OPERATING
UJDGET
OFFICE
OF THE
CITY MANAGER
GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCSATION
Distinguished
Budget Presentation
Award
PRESENTED TO
City of San Jose,
California
For the Fiscal Year Beginning
\
July 1 y 2000
Executive Director
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada
( GFOA) presented an award of Distinguished Presentation to the City of San Jose
for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1,200O.
In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget
document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations
guide, as a financial plan and as a communication device.
The award is valid for a period of one year only. We believe our current budget
continues to conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to
GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award.
California Societu of
JVLunici~ al J; nance bjjicers
Certificate of Award
Excellence in Operational Budgeting 2000- 2001
Presented to
City of San Jose
This crrtfficate wcognfzrs thr achicvrment of Excrllrnce in Opcratfonal Uu+ tfn~ ami rcflccta an outntand! ng luu+ yt __ . . . . . . . .
Dedicated to Excellence in Municipal Financial Management
L
200 l- 2002
OPERATING
BUDGET
DEL D. BORCSD~ RF
CITY MANAGER
200 l- 2002
OPERATING
BUDGET
City of San Jose
2001- 2002 Adopted Operating Budget
Table of Contents Page
City Manager’s 2001- 2002 Adopted Budget Message .......................
Attachment A - Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ...........................
Attachment B - Status of Mayor and City Council Rqfkrals ..........................
Attachment C - Status of City Auditor Recommendations
withFundingImpact ............................................
1
14
22
27
Community Profile
City ofSun Jose Stats b Facts
Roster of City Elected Oficials
City Organization Chart
Annual Budget Process
Budget Guide
BudgetGuide ............................................................... I- 1
ElossayofTerms ............................................................ I- 6
FundDescriptions ........................................................... I- 9
2001- 2002 Summary Information
TotalCitySourceand LIseofFunds( AIlFunds) .................................... II- 1
Summa y of Transfers, Loans and Contributions ................................... II - 7
Summary of Total Departmental Operations ( All Funds) ............................. II - 11
Summa y of Expenditures by Department/ Function ................................. II - 12
Summary of Fund Activity .................................................... II - 15
Summa y of General Fund Sources ( Graph and Table) .............................. II - 18
Summa y of General Fund Uses ( Graph and Tabfe) ................................. II - 20
General Fund Uses by Catego y .......... ...................................... II- 23
Summary of Capital Funds ..................................................... II - 24
Summa y of Position Changes ................................................. II - 25
Summa y of Sfafing by Function ( Graph) ........................................ II - 27
History and Trend Information
Five- Year Comparison of Key General Fund Sources ( Graph) .,*.........*............. III- 1
Five- Year Comparison of General Fund Sources .~..,.........,.~...,..~~.~~~,.,... III - 2
Five- Year Comparison of General Fund Uses by Function ( Graph and Table) . a . , + . , _ . , . a . III - 3
Five- Year Comparison of Key Capital Sources ( Graph) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III - 5
Five- Year Comparison of Position Totals ( Graph and Table) . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e III - 6
Budget Policies and Practices
Budget Policies .............................................................. l- v- 1
Signi$ cant Accounting Practices .............. ................................. Iv- 12
Debt Service Obligations ...................................................... l- v- 14
General Fund Revenue Estimates
Overoiew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V- 1
GeneralFundRevenueDescriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..~.~............~ . . . . . . . . V- 36
Departmental Information
City Service Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . _ _ . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI-~
City of San Jose
2001- 2002 Adopted Operating Budget
Table of Contents Page /
City Departments
Airport ...................................................................
CityAttorney ..............................................................
CityAuditor ................................................................
CityClerk ..................................................................
CityManager ...............................................................
Civil Service Commission .... .................................................
Conventions, Arts b Entertainment ............................................
Economic Development .......................................................
EmergencyServices .........................................................
Environmental Services ......................... .............................
EqualityAssurance .........................................................
Finance ...................................................................
Fire ......................................................................
GeneralServices ........................................ . ...................
Housing ...................................................................
Human Resources ..........................................................
Independent Police Auditor ....................................................
InformationTechnology ......................................................
Libra y ....................................................................
Mayor and City Council ......................................................
Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services .....................................
Planning, Building and Code Enforcement .......................................
Planning Commission ......................................................
Police .....................................................................
Public Works ..............................................................
RedevelopmentAgency .......................................................
Retirement Services .........................................................
Transportation .............................................................
City- Wide
City- Wide Expenses ........................................................
General Fund Capital, Transfers, Reserves ........................................
Inter- Departmental Programs
Community Development Block Grant ...........................................
Heal thy Neighborhood Venture Fund ............................................
Integrated Waste Management ................................................
SewerService& UseChargeFund ..............................................
Storm Sewer Operating Fund ..................................................
Transient Occupancy Tax ....................................................
Detail of Departmental Positions ...........................................
Please refe to the Table of Contents
Source & Use Of Funds Statements .........................................
Please refer to the Table of Contents
Appendix
Mayor's Budget Message ( March & June Reports)
1
27
47
57
67
81
85
105
121
133
171
183
205
241
269
289
313
321
351
371
377
411
447
451 ’
485
513
535
545
599
635
653
669
689
697
705
713
723
765
a
SF: L
mC D
N
0
0
+
lb
a
0
N
i
CITYOF &? h SAN JOSE
CAI’ITAL OF SILICON VALLEY C1l- f MANAGER
October 4,200l
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
I am pleased to present the 2001- 2002 Adopted Operating Budget for the City of San Jose. This
document, along with the 2001- 2002 Adopted Capital Budget and the 2002- 06 Adopted Capital
Improvement Program, presents a comprehensive plan for how the City organization will meet the
community’s service needs while protecting and enhancing the City’s infrastructure investment and
maintaining its fiscal integrity in the face of a changing economic landscape.
Several external influences, primarily the deteriorating economic situation and the California energy
crisis, were key drivers influencing all of our budget decision- making. In response to those factors,
this Adopted Budget appropriately uses conservative revenue estimates and carefully limits ongoing
funding obligations that result from new program additions.
This budget recognized the economic signals present during its formulation. While overall City
revenue collections remained very strong during the period when this budget was formulated
( March- May), it seemed certain to us even then that changes in the economy would reduce City
revenue projections. Key signals included the following: the technology- rich NASDAQ had been
falling since April 2000; local companies were beginning to report lower earnings and limited layoffs;
and, in March, unemployment in Santa Clara County increased for the hrst time in several years, to
2.2%, up from 1.8% in the previous month, although still at that time substantially below the
national rate.
It is now clear that choosing this conservative course was very prudent. Since the adoption of this
budget the econo_ my has worsened significantly, The most recent iurnernploym- ent report showed
that the Santa Clara County rate has more than doubled since March, rising above the national rate to
5.4%. Many more local companies, among them some of the City’s largest taxpayers, have
announced significant, dips in revenue and layoffs. Finally, as this document goes to press, the
impacts of the terrorist attack on New York and Washington are just beginning to unfold. While
the ultimate impact on the national and local economy is not known, there is a growing consensus
that this event will drive an already weak economy into a recession.
Although this budget was formulated during positive economic conditions, we anticipated a
downturn in revenues and a challenging year. Current circumstances are far more difficult than
predicted, but our approach has left us in a strong position to meet these challenges.
801 N. First St. San Jose, CA 95110 rd ( 408) 277- 5777 . fu (- UN) 277- 3131 www. ci. san- jose. ca. us
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
IThis budget was also heavily influenced by the significant changes, experienced by both the City
organization and the people we serve -- changes that include who we are and where we live. The
recently released 2000 Census data reveals an increasingly diverse city. During the last decade, our
population grew by 14%. The number of Asians more than doubled, and the Hispanic population
grew by 30%. We are a community that can truly celebrate its diversity. The Ccnsna slsn nhnwq a
population that is shifting its living
patterns - moving away from the
City’s urban core to the more
suburban sections of San Jose. As
these changes continue, we will
experience and will need to react
appropriately to continuously changing
public expectations for the delivery of
City services.
ECONOMIC OVERVIEW
By the end of the fiscal year, the national economy had been showing definite signs of slowing for
some months. California and the local economy, however, were lagging behind this trend, with City
revenues remaining extremely strong through June. Tangible signs of the slowdown are now,
however, clearly evident in Silicon Valley. Among the most visible indicators are poor earnings
reports and personnel layoff announcements from local firms, some of these from the region’s most
established companies. The housing market has also softened considerably, with a sharp decline in
the number of homes sold. Further, the amount of occupied commercial real estate in Silicon Valley
has dropped since the first quarter of the calendar year.
We have worked hard to position ourselves to respond to this situation. Some prominent observers
are convinced that we have succeeded. In a recent move to upgrade the City’s bond rating to AA+,
the highest among California’s large cities, Gabriel Petek of Standard and Poor’s said of San Jose,
“ Located in the heart of Silicon Valley, their economic base is extremely strong and they have shown
over the years very good financial management. Those two things are the driving factors behind the
upgrade.” He went on to say that even with a slowdown in the high tech sector of the economy, the
economy in San Jose would remain strong.
The impact of the California energy crisis, although not in the headlines in recent weeks, still has the
potential to pose a continuing challenge to the overall fiscal health of this region. In an attempt to
address the energy problem, the California Department of Water Resources entered into contracts
to purchase electricity for resale to utility customers in California. While plans still call for these
purchases are to be financed through bond proceeds and eventually recovered from utility
customers through future rate payments. However the State’s General Fund was used to purchase
2
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
ECONOMIC OVERVIEW ( COI\ TT’D;)
electricity until the bond sales occur, which has depleted the State surplus. If the State encounters
financial difficulties as a result of these actions and the economic slowdown, we will need to be
vigilant concerning how those problems might impact the City.
ImDact on Citv’s Revenues
Given this economic picture, the most significant challenge in developing the budget was to project
just how the slowdown in the economy and the energy crisis would affect collections in the City’s
economically sensitive revenue categories. These revenues had experienced unprecedented growth
over the past several years, benefiting horn the longest economic expansion in U. S. history and the
strength of Silicon Valley’s technology sector. As a result of the strong performance in these
categories, the General Fund experienced average annual revenue growth of almost 8% over the last
five years. This rate was approximately double the 4% growth experienced during the first half of
the 199Os, when the economy was in distress. While collections in the Sales Tax, Property Tax,
Construction and Conveyance Tax, and Transient Occupancy Tax categories fared particularly well
in recent years, with annual growth rates reaching double- digit levels, it was clear that this level could
not be sustained forever.
Last year’s excellent revenue collection experience exacerbated the challenge of predicting future
revenue performance with a high level of confidence. Through the entire 2000- 2001 fiscal year,
revenue growth continued at record highs, with sales tax growth ending the year 21% over the 1999-
2000 collection level. Motor Vehicle In- Lieu fees were almost 10% above the prior year and
Property Tax collections ended the year 12.1% above the prior year. Construction and Conveyance
Tax receipts posted record gains, with collections tracking 9% above the 1999- 2000 levels. The only
category to exhibit any signs of a slowdown by the end of last year was the Transient Occupancy
Tax. Even with this backdrop of predominantly strong revenue growth, however, there was no
question that the economic downturn would soon translate into weaker performance in some of the
City’s largest revenue categories. Long before formulating this budget, the City began taking steps
to strengthen its long- term fiscal health. Reserves were increased and the City carefully avoided
using one- time resources to fund ongoing costs. Last year, anticipated year- end fund balances were
set aside at the Mid- Year Budget Review and the Contingency Reserve at year- end stood at $ 20.2
million.
When the initial 2002- 2006 General Fund Forecast was developed in January, the predominant
thinking among economists was cautious optimism that the economic slowdown would be
reasonably short- lived in both the national and local economies and that the economy would not
sink into a recession ( defined as two straight quarters of negative growth). By April, however, when
the Proposed Budget was being produced, it became apparent that the economic slowdown would
be worse than anticipated. To reflect this more pessimistic outlook, revenue estimates utilized in the
Proposed and Adopted Budgets were reduced below that of the original 2002- 2006 Forecast for
several of the General Fund’s economically sensitive revenue categories.
i
3
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
ECONOMIC OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
ImDact on Citv’s Revenues ( Cc& d.)
The largest downward revision was in the Sales Tax category, which was reduced from $ 158 million
in the Forecast to $ 153.65 million in the Adopted Budget. In the Forecast, it was assumed that Sales
Tax receipts would increase by approximately 10% in 2000- 2001 and an additional 2% in 2001- 2002.
The Proposed and Adopted Budget were revised to assume stronger growth in 2000- 2001, but to be
followed by a decline of slightly over 6% in 2001- 2002.
Other categories that were revised downwards included the Transient Occupancy Tax estimate, the
Unsecured Property Tax estimate, and the General Fund Interest, Ea. mings estimate.
The estimates for City revenues as finally adopted were intended to allow for a fairly significant
slowdown in the economy. In the event of a very severe or prolonged economic downturn, the City
would also be able to rely on reserves that had been accumulated for such a possibility over the last
several years. In addition to the General Fund Contingency Reserve, a $ 5.65 million reserve
established to address future potential shortfalls, and a reserve of $ 15 million for potential Workers’
Compensation and/ or General Liability problems has remained untouched for a number of years.
In past slowdowns, the City successfully minimized the impacts through conservative fiscal policies
and efficient use of resources. The City continues to maintain the lowest number of employees per
capita of any major city in the nation. With these comparatively lower operating costs, the City is in
a more favorable condition when the economy slows. This budget balances the competing needs of
responding to the largest capital budget in the City’s history, the service demands of a growing
population and the revenue constraints of a volatile economy.
When analyzing General Fund revenues, it is also important to keep in mind that only about half of
the categories are tied directly to the performance of the economy. The remaining areas, while
impacted by overall economic performance, are primarily driven by other factors. For instance,
growth in the Utility Tax and Franchise Fee categories is typically more heavily impacted by rate
changes than economic growth. Collections from local, state and federal agencies are driven by the
grant and reimbursement funding that becomes available. Because these revenue sources do not
track directly with the performance of the economy, they can act as a buffer during an economic
slowdown, easing the impact of drop- offs in the economically sensitive categories.
BUDGET OVERVIEW
This year’s budget was formulated by reviewing investment proposals in each of the City’s seven
City Service Areas. These areas combine departmental budget proposals to focus on outcomes
expected by our residents. This performance- based approach called “ Investing in Results” provided
an overall framework for the presentation. The following are our City Service Areas ( CSAs): 1)
Aviation; 2) Economic and Neighborhood Development; 3) Environment and Utility Services; 4)
Public Safety; 5) Recreation and Cultural Services; 6) Transportation; and 7) Strategic Support. I
4
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
In the FY 2001- 2002 Adopted Budget, the total net approved funding is $ 2,661,815,404 for all City
funds ( General, Special, and Capital). This is $ 631,540,000 or 31 . l% higher than the FY 2000- 2001
Adopted Budget Fable 1 below). Under this spending plan, the total number of positions
increased by approximately 6.3% to a total of 7,465. The increase in employees and the significant
jump in the budget are both driven primarily by the Capital Improvement Program and the
successful bond elections for Parks and Libraries.
TABLE I
2001- 02 ADOPTED BUDGET - ALL FUNDS
General Fund 96 716,919,516 $ 817,107,260 14.0%
Special Funds $ 1,081,149,630 $ 1,216,785,681 12.5%
< Less: Operating Transfers> ( 3 472,419,814) ($ 520,090,652) 10.1%
Net Operating Funds $ 1,325,649,332 $ 1,5X3,802,289 14.2%
Capital Funds $ 722,555, OOO $ 1,160,672,260 60.6%
< Less: Capital Transfers> ( 3 17,929, OOO) ($ 12,661,145) ( 29.4)%
Net Capital Funds $ 704,626, OOO $ 962,168,855 36.6%
The General Fund portion of the City’s Budget increased by 14% from
2000- 2001, and totals $ 817,107,260. This increase includes the rebudgeting of $ 89.8 million in
unspent 2000- 2001 allocations for
completion of programs and projects City Service Areas
authorized in the prior year.
The pie chart shows the additions in all
fimrlc hv & v CeriGlpe A+ Po- AvLtinm C~,- c- rr; r-~ c
*---- ‘ I J YVL v * I- ** A-... . *. .‘. YVLI “_*. IWbY
2%; Economic and Neighborhood
Development, 11%; 4% for Environmental
and Utility Services; 13% for Public Safety;
24% for Recreation and Cultural Services;
10% for Transportation; 29% for Strategic
Support; and 8% for Other.
A complete detail of the General Fund
balancing stxategy can be found in
Attachment A - Reconciling General Fund
Bz/ dgeAt ctions.
Avbtbn Economic &
Environmental
1L utilnv
Public Safety
13%
Recreation &
CUltW8l
services
24%
5
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
Budget Contiwencv Plan
The 2001- 2002 Adopted Budget was formulated based upon the best fiscal information available as
the budget was being prepared. Two significant revenue issues were, however, unresolved at the
time of adoption --
fund balance.
revenue impacts from the State budget and the size of the General Fund ending
In combination, these funds could impact the City’s fiscal future and revenue
collections in 2001- 2002.
Recognizing that the impact might result in additional funds being available, the Mayor and Council
approved a Budget Contingency Plan, to be considered if these unresolved issues resulted in
additional resources. That plan balanced the need to moderate the revenue/ expenditure imbalance
estimated in future years while funding high priority needs. Council direction provided that should
positive news be forthcoming, during its review of the City Manager’s A~ ual Financial Report in
October, the Mayor and Council would review and approve allocations from the budget contingency
list for immediate implementation.
The 2001- 2002 Adopted Operating Budget, was also guided by the priorities of meeting
neighborhood needs and delivering on capital project commitments, while at the same time limiting
additions to the ongoing operating budget in the face of a changing economic future. In keeping
with the City Council’s commitment to improving San Jose neighborhoods, projects that strengthen
the City’s Strong Neighborhoods Initiative were ranked highly, as were those that ensure the
organization’s ability to deliver the City’s capital projects. With the voters’ approval last November
of $ 440 million in general obligation bonds for new library and parks construction, a comprehensive
strategy to deliver these and other capital projects on time and within budget has been developed.
Of the 298 FTE positions added in this budget, nearly 22% ( 65.0 FTE) were recommended to
strengthen our capital projects delivery program. The City’s new Animal Services Division will be
staffed with 54 new positions. Other positions are targeted to address critical priority areas such as
neighborhoods ( 32 positions), technology ( 26.5 positions), and to meet the increased demands of
the development community ( 36 positions). To further protect our long- term financial health,
ongoing additions to the City’s operating budget were rnimmized and Redevelopment Agency funds
utilized where appropriate. Among other efforts, the Agency will support the following: the Strong
Neighborhoods Initiative by funding three positions in the Attorney’s Office ($ 267,000); three of
five new inspectors approved for proactive community code enforcement ($ 275,000); development
of Neighborhood Improvement Plans ($ 250,000); and an upgrade of the Convention Center sound
system ($ 800,000).
Response to the EnerPv Crisis
Energy is one of the critical issues the City will clearly need to face in the coming year. As approved
by the Council, this Budget includes $ l, OOO, OOO for relief from high ut; l; ty bills for low- income
6
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW $ xw~ B.)
Response to the Enewv Crisis ( Cont’d.)
households, and funds significant increases to pay the City’s increasing cost of electricity. It also
canies forward work to implement the Mayor’s Smart Energy Plan, including the review of City
properties and other sites that may be suitable for clean, appropriately sized power plants. Work is
also proceeding to identify alternatives for new electrical energy supplies at the San Jose- Santa Clara
Water Pollution Control Plant and opportunities to reduce the City’s use of electricity through
conservation and the study of alternative energy sources.
Stratetic SUDDOI-~
To assist the City’s operating departments to meet their performance targets, three areas were
emphasized in the Adopted Budget: 1) recruitment and retention; 2) effective utilization of
technology; and, 3) customer service.
Recruitment and Retention - A special interdepartmental task force is working to fill mission-critical
and difficult to recruit positions, and resources have been set aside for this effort.
Technology - Over the past year, the Information Technology Planning Board ( ITPB), comprised
of both City senior staff members and private sector members, has addressed the challenges facing
the City by establishing a strategic vision for the City and prioritizing new technology initiatives.
In the past year, new initiatives implemented included ‘ Permits On Line”, City Council agendas on
line, video streaming of Council meetings, and the Customer Service Call Center. Following the
ITPB’s strategic vision, the following new initiatives are funded in this budget to add to the City’s
menu of 24/ 7 services:
l Permanent staffing for the Customer Service Call Center;
l Implementing the e- Government strategy that includes a new, user- friendly portal “ San
Jose Wizard,” service requests online, and online payments for business taxes, parking
citations, and utility bills; and
e Expansion = CA AUPIC YTIU ; ALL.. UnJ. J c D PL- uLal- L. w1L.. ll ml. . J- Lel...“ v+ LLcLoa .
In order to assure reliability of the technology that supports these programs and services, funding
was included to provide redundancy of the network, and a second shift was also funded that will
allow the backup of key systems during the hours when use of these systems is minimal.
Customer Service - The new 24/ 7 Customer Service Call Center was opened on schedule in
January, 2001. As indicated, funding for full staffing is in place in the Adopted Budget and service
request s ummaries are being to be reported to Council. The Center is the focal point of an
organization- wide effort to upgrade our customer service. In support of that effort our first
community survey was completed last November. The community newsletter Lztide SanJO. re further
extends this customer service effort by providing information about city ser& es directly to every
7
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
Stratepic SUDDOI-~ ( Co& d.)
household in San Jose. In addition, the City’s customer service effort will be expanded with the
addition of two positions at the Airport to broaden community outreach efforts and strengthen
neighborhood interaction.
Buildiw Strong Neiphborhoods
The City of San Jose, already the safest large City in America, has set out to have the best residential
quality of life of any large city in America. The centerpiece of that strategy is the Strong
Neighborhoods Initiative, a citywide effort to strengthen families and community leadership,
coordinate the development and implementation of neighborhood plans as well as improve service
delivery.
In order to be effective in this effort, the City is actively working with neighborhoods and assisting
residents in the development of priorities. By focusing resources from the City, the Redevelopment
Agency, private investment, and public- private partnerships, and by realigning service delivery, the
Strong Neighborhoods Initiative will improve neighborhood conditions, enhance community safety,
expand community services, and strengthen neighborhood associations.
The 2001- 2002 Adopted Budget continues efforts to strengthen our city’s neighborhoods. The
(
Redevelopment Agency has included $ 20 million to be utilized for SNI priorities as identified in
neighborhood plans, another $ 4 million to be added to the current housing rehabilitation program,
and $ 2 million for historic preservation rehabilitation loans. SNI blight survey results identified
vehicle and property blight ‘ as a significant problem in neighborhoods. Four additional code
enforcement inspectors and an administrative position were approved for proactive community
code enforcement at a cost of $ 523,000. These positions will assist with abandoned vehicle
abatement and other selective neighborhood area Council priorities. Nearly $ 300,000 was approved
for four positions to improve graffiti response time to 48 hours. Also included in the Adopted
Budget are additional funds ($ 188,200) to create a fifth set of Neighborhood Clean- Ups and to
expand clean- ups in public rights- of- way, both of which were requested by neighborhoods and the
council.
Traffic calming has quickly become a major theme and priority within our neighborhoods. Capital
funding for traffic calming was increased by $ 5 million, and a capital- funded position was added to
focus on strong neighborhoods. Additional capital funding of $ 2 million is included for sidewalk
and curb and gutter repair and replacement.
Continuing support for programs such as San Jose LEARNS, SAGE, Smart Start and Safe Schools
will help leverage educational opportunities for our youth. For the Smart Start Program, an
additional $ 1.4 million was approved and would be used to leverage an additional $ 2 million from
the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, if we are successful in that grant application. Expansion
8
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
Buildirw Strom Neighborhoods ( Cont’d.)
of Homework Centers at a cost of $ 640,000 for 40 new sites will achieve the Mayor’s goal of having
centers accessible to every child in San Jose, bringing the total number of centers to 233 by the end
of fiscal year 2002. The City of San Jose continues to reach beyond its traditional responsibilities to
strengthen and support local schools. In a further effort to recruit and retain San Jose teachers, this
budget includes $ 100,000 to double the amount of funding available for the Future Teacher Loan
Program. One- time funding of $ 600,000 was set aside to implement recommendations that will be
proposed by the Blueprint for Bridging the Digital Divide. The Blueprint is scheduled for release
early in the fiscal year.
Tranmortation
Safe and convenient transportation facilities and services play a critical role in the quality of life for
our community. Traffic congestion was cited frequently as an issue facing the City by residents
participating in the 2000 community survey. Four critical outcomes were identified for action: 1)
viable choices in travel modes; 2) convenient commute to the workplace; 3) efficient access to major
activity centers; and, 4) enhanced community livability. A new Transportation Department was
created this year to focus on these priorities.
i
Building on the achievements of this year, the FY 2001- 2002 budget identifies investment packages
that reflect the use of base and new resources. To reduce traffic congestion on major thoroughfares,
the budget adds to the City’s current network of 542 SMART technology intersections and enhances
the maintenance and repair of traffic signals. In the Downtown, two positions were added in the
General Fund to support construction traffic coordination and relief. The most significant freeway
traffic relief project involves construction of the Bailey intersection and extension at Highway 101.
Three additional positions will supplement the Transportation Department’s efforts to implement
Measures A and B as well as the Valley Transportation Plan 2020. The City’s current CIP has
$ 600,000 to support rail transit project management such as Light Rail, Caltrain and California high-speed
rail. Effective implementation of regional intelligent traffic systems will be enhanced through
the additional investment of over $ 400,000, which will provide five positions and leverage millions
of dollars in grant funding.
It is estimated that completing the entire City system of streets, traffic signals, bikeways and
pedestrian facilities would require $ 421 million and a 20- plus year schedule. The adopted five- year
CIP plan includes $ 91 million for that purpose. Three traffic signal and street light design and
engineering personnel as well as six general and administrative transportation engineering positions
were added to implement these projects and enhance the delivery of traffic calming projects.
\
,,’
The City’s street maintenance program including resurfacing and reconstruction is a major priority
for neighborhood residents, and this year’s budget represents one of the largest investments in
recent years. The 2001- 2002 Adopted Capital Budget contains $ 20.3 million in
9
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
TransDortation ( Cm& d.)
funding for direct maintenance costs and will transfer $ 1.5 million to support infrastructure
maintenance costs in the General Fund Budget. In order to ensure quality and timely contractor
performance, two additional positions were approved to augment our current investment. An
additional $ 1.8 million investment was approved to enhance street tree landscaping, sidewalk
reconstruction, weed abatement, and median islands. Upgrades in median and landscape
maintenance are also included in the budget.
Aviation
San Jose International Airport ( SJC) is one of the most important municipal assets in generating and
supporting economic activity. It is estimated that the three international airports ( San Jose, San
Francisco and Oakland) generate over $ 40 billion in business revenues and support almost 500,000
jobs. SJC has captured a larger percentage of the business travel market than either of the other two
airports and has had the strongest overall passenger growth. The growth and expansion of SJC
facilities in a manner that respects and protects neighborhoods and other nearby properties is
essential to the long- term economic strength of San Jose and the South Bay region.
The Adopted Budget, and the five- year CIP, fund continued planning and design processes leading 1
to build- out of the adopted Airport Master Plan improvements. Funding and design alternatives for
critical transportation projects located around the airport are moving forward and are scheduled to
be presented to the City Council this fiscal year for final approval. These include increased capacity
at Coleman and 880, an automated people mover connection with Light Rail, improvements to three
Airport traffic entrances and completion of Route 87. The acoustical treatment of homes and
schools affected by certain noise levels has been augmented in this budget. An additional
neighborhood was added to the acoustical treatment program. This expansion requires the
treatment of up to an additional 700 dwellings. Recent terrorists attacks in Washington, DC and
New York City will clearly, however, necessitate a re- evaluation of our airport projects during the
next several months.
DeveloDment
In the City’s development services programs, the strong San Jose economy has strained private and
public resources alike as most forrns of land development have continued at a record pace. The
Adopted Budget addresses this challenge by targeting new resources to improve service levels in
activities that support planning and development services. In the last four years, the City issued over
40,000 building permits annually, compared to an average of 28,000 annually in the three preceding
years. The growth in construction inspection activity has been even greater. While development
service staff have gone to extraordinary lengths to meet these demands, service levels have not kept
pace with construction volume.
10
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW (& wT’D.)
DeveloDment ( Cont’d.)
Investment proposals were approved in these areas to bring service levels back to those that are
more consistent with the needs and expectations of homeowners and the development industry, and
which can be funded by a combination of current resources and reserves.
While this budget presumed that relatively high levels of development activity would continue well
into 2001- 2002, we were also mindful of growing signals that the economy is slowing and the pace
of development in the recent past may not continue. For that reason we accumulated reserves in
each of the fee areas, and will watch the indicators of service demand carefully, ready to adjust
resources to reflect declining activity levels, including allowing positions to remain vacant if
improved service levels can still be achieved. This approach will be especially important as regards
Cisco’s development in Coyote Valley. In light of the economic slowdown and Cisco’s construction
delay in Alviso, staff is monitoring Cisco’s Coyote effort to ensure that we utilize reserves and
maintain flexibility in hiring for Cisco- related building and inspection services.
CaDital Projects
San Jose is embarking on its largest capital improvements program ever. In January of last year, the
Airport broke ground on new runway projects, kicking off phase one of the Airport Master Plan
construction program. Nine months later in October, the Joint Library groundbreaking occurred.
This year work is underway on the first of 115 projects funded by the passage of Library and Parks
bonds. By any measure, the schedule of capital projects to be delivered during this decade is
exceptional.
While the individual projects may be relatively small, the projects that are funded by the $ 228 million
library bond issue and the $ 212 million parks bond measure will affect the most members of our
community. Built on community inspired master plans and strong voter approval, they represent
clear community and Council priorities.
To begin the implementation of these neighborhood projects, an executive oversight committee was
formed soon after the bond measures passed to coordinate project delivery. To ensure that
departments had the necessary resources to deliver projects on time, 26 critical support staff for
Public Works, Library, PRNS, and Finance were added at Mid- Year. To focus further special
attention on these and other critical capital delivery projects such as the Airport and the new Civic
Center, realignment in the City Manager’s Office created the Deputy City Manager for Capital
Projects to head the team. The Parks and Recreation Commission and Library Cornmission will act
as the citizens oversight committee.
11
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
Cat& al Proiects ( Cont’d.)
Completing the team and included in this Budget are nine new positions. Three positions will be
created for PRNS to manage regional park projects, two positions to help Libraries and four in
Public Works. Their role is to be 100% focused in assuring that their respective departmental teams
deliver the projects not only on time and witbin budget, but also to include designed and
programmed neighborhood participation.
Utilities
The City’s own municipal utility services also present policy decisions in FY 2001- 2002. The City
Council reviewed a Request for Proposal in June and solicited proposals to lease or operate the
Municipal Water System, which are due later this the year. However, our analysis of System
revenues and costs for the coming year showed that regardless of the outcome of that process, an
increase in retail water rates of approximately 5% was necessary in FY 2001- 2002. This increase is
necessary to recover the expected cost increases in the price of wholesale water supplies received
from the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the increased costs of utilities that hit our system like
every other business in the state. Price increases for wholesale water were absorbed by reserves in
the System for the past several years, but a modest increase in retail rates is now required.
Storm Sewer fees face similar pressures from increasing operating costs and the funding needs for
critical major capital improvements to mitigate flood conditions at several locations in the city. At
current fee levels, insufficient funding for these improvements will be available after FY 2001- 2002,
not including a list of improvements we expect will be identified through the SNI planning
processes.
Public Safetv
The Adopted Budget includes investments of $ 16.2 million in the Public Safety City Service Area.
Several investment proposals were funded, each designed to achieve the goals and objectives
identified in the Public Safety CSA Business Plan.
To help the public feel safe anywhere, anytime in San Jose, the Adopted Budget adds host-responder,
Advanced Life Support capabilities to all fire truck companies. Currently four fire truck
companies have a paramedic onboard to provide advanced life support. The Adopted Budget also
adds a paramedic to the seven remaining fue truck companies to increase greatly the Fire
Department’s ability to respond immediately with life- saving services at the scene of an accident, fire
or medical call. In addition, funding to continue to pay for paramedic certification for all ranks in
the Fire Department will increase the number of qualified paramedics to service the public with
emergency medical services.
12
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
Public Safetv ( Cont’d.)
The Fire Department’s reflex response time will also be enhanced by the addition of three new fire
engines and one new fire truck for fire training purposes. At a cost of $ 2.7 million, the new
equipment will be dedicated to fire training programs and exercises. This equipment will enable the
Department to conduct training exercises without having to divert existing company engines and
trucks from their stations, thereby leaving them available to respond to emergencies.
The Adopted Budget also adds seven critical positions to the Fire Department, at a cost of $ 600,000,
to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of hre services as identified in the Fire Strategic Plan.
They include a Senior Public Safety Dispatcher to improve the quality of medical response and
treatment instructions given to responding units. An information and financial data management
team also is funded to enhance analytical support for the department. The team includes an
Administrative Officer, a Senior Systems Officer, an Analyst and a Staff Technician. Finally,
funding was set- aside in an earmarked reserve to improve the delivery of fire supplies and
equipment to our fire stations.
The City enjoys the benefit of a wide expanse of open space and wild lands within the city limits, but
the proximity also presents potential fire risks to the community. A Wildlands Program Manager is
included in the Adopted Budget to complete a hazard assessment, develop mitigation plans, educate
the community and review use of fire fighting personnel and equipment.
All four of these major investments were identified in the Fire Strategic Plan as critical priorities that
need to be implemented in the short term. The additional equipment and personnel will improve
fire service response in San Jose without having to build additional stations.
Our residents will also benefit from the addition of 21 new public safety positions for the Police and
Fire Departments. In the Police Department, additions included eight police officers, three police
investigators, one latent fingerprint examiner and a non- sworn information systems manager. The
additional police personnel will help maintain resources to meet the public safety needs of our
residents and will strengthen key priority service areas identified by the Mayor and the City Council.
The eight new officers will help staff the City’s Community Policing Centers, which are an
important component of our Strong Neighborhoods Initiative. Two centers are open and
operational. One is located in South San Jose, at Oakridge Mall. The other is located in East San
Jose at the Tropicana Shopping Center. Two additional policing centers wiIl be added in the
upcoming fiscal year. The investment of eight officers will expand the hours of operation from 25
hours per week to approximately 47 hours per week, providing residents with additional
opportunities to interact with our law enforcement officers.
To assist in the fight against domestic and school violence, three new police investigators were
added to increase the number of domestic and juvenile violence cases that are assigned and resolved
by the Police Department. The new investigators will specifically work domestic and elder abuse,
13
FY 2001- 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MESSAGE
BUDGET OVERVIEW ( CONT’D.)
Public Safety ( Cont’d.)
and juvenile assault cases, as prioritized by the Mayor and City Council. In addition, funding has
been added to enable San Jose Family Violence Center advocates to provide a wide range of
domestic violence support services, including safety planning, crisis intervention, law enforcement
liaison, court preparation support, and ongoing support and consultation.
CONCLUSION
The City of San Jose continues to maintain a position of financial strength, despite external
influences such as a softening economy and the uncertainty brought on by the energy crisis and the
national tragedy of the terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, DC. Nonetheless, it is
especially important that we continue our fiscally conservative posture in the coming year. This
Adopted Budget focuses resources on enhancing existing service delivery and positioning the
organization to deliver on its significant commitments to the community. It further builds on the
renewed partnership with the Redevelopment Agency and continues to integrate City and Agency
resources to address community needs in a more comprehensive way.
The City’s long- term fmancial strategies resulted this year in San Jose being awarded the highest
credit rating of California’s largest cities. This credit rating is a direct indicator of the City’s financial
strength and the confidence that rating agencies have in our ability to manage resources effectively.
This Adopted Budget continues the financial discipline that is so necessary in the face of a possible
economic downturn.
The strength of an organization can be measured by the quality of its workforce. As always, it is our
dedicated City employees who are our strongest asset. In particular, I would like to take this
opportunity to recognize the extraordinary effort of the many employees who made a direct
contribution to the preparation and production of this budget and to express my sincere
appreciation for a job well done.
City Manager
14
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
INTRODUCTION
This document provides a summary of the
revenue estimates and key balancing actions
approved for the General Fund in the process
of crafting the 2001- 2002 Adopted Budget. A
description of significant revisions to the
original Forecast Base Budget and revisions
approved to the Proposed Budget in the last
stage of the process of approving the
Adopted Budget are included.
In February 2001, the Administration
presented its initial projections for the 2001-
2002 fiscal year in the General Fund Five- Year
Economic Forecast and Revenue Pyections
document. The 2001- 2002 base- case
projection showed a positive balance of $ 9.83
million. This ‘ k. lrplus” represented the
difference between projected 2001- 2002
General Fund resources and the expected cost
of providing current services in that year. The
cost estimate included a number of Council-directed
additions for which firm funding
decisions had been made.
After the release of that February Forecast, a
number of changes were incorporated into a
Revised Forecast estimate to reflect more current
economic conditions and cost/ activity
adjustments. These changes resulted in a net
downward adjustment of available ongoing
funding of $ 1.83 million.
In the process of formulating the Proposed
Budget, resources totaling $ 32.1 million and
costs totaling $ 40.1 million were added to the
Revised Forecast level. This resulted in a
balanced 2001- 2002 Proposed General Fund
Budget.
Following the issuance of the Proposed
Budget, resources and costs totaling S95.05
million were added, resulting in a balanced
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget totaling S817.1
million.
2001- 2002
Forecast To Adopted Budget Reconciliation
February Forecast $ 686.85 // $ 677.02 $ 9.83
-- I.___--_.--_____ /
-.--.--.-~-- j- -~
-._---_--- F_ o.- r_ e. c-- a_ s_ t _.- R--- e_.. v..-- is- ions ----- -_.--- 3-. 7-- 7.- -&---.--~ i 4_ L9-- 4- J --( 1.831 -.--__...
Revised Forecast 689.96 1 681.96 / 8.00
-.---- i-
----~ Proposed Revisions --_-__--.-. z ----- 32.10 4 40.70 ._-._.-.-,-.(&. .’! g
2001- 2002 Proposed
! /
722.06 /
&---.~.--.--.----
722.06 j 0
---.,,..- i
Adopted Revisipns +---““---~. __. 9.- 5-‘ - 0-- 5 .-.---+- 95.05 I 0- ---.
2001- 2002 Adopted 817.11 / 817.11 ! 0
15
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
REVISED FORECAST BASE BUDGET
As discussed above, following the issuance of
that February Forecast, detailed analysis of the
status of City revenues and expenditures
continued. Based on this review, a number of
changes to the Base Budget estimates
a new Revised Forecast. That new “ Forecast
Base Budget” reflected a net surplus of funds
available of just under $ 8.0 million, down
approximately $ 1.8 million from the February
surplus figure.
presented in February were incorporated into
Revisions to the revenue estimates incorporated into the Revised Forecast included the following:
Revenue Source Revision
Property Tax
Sales Tax
$ ( 315,000)
Transient Occupancy Tax
( 4,350, OOO)
Licenses & Permits
( 700,000)
Revenue from Money and Property
2,887, OOO
Revenue from Local Agencies
( 525,000)
420,000
Revenue from State of California
Departmental Charges
( 66,000)
Other Revenue
1,461, OOO
Overhead Reimbursements
1,053,000
Transfers
2,553, OOO
691,000
Net Change in Revenues $ 3,109,000
Expenditure adjustments made from the February Forecast base included:
( Negative amount equates to an increase in cost)
Expenditure item Revision
Salary Reserve
Reimbursable Mid- Year Actions
Annualization of Costs Previously Approved by City Council
Various Revised Cost Estimates
Miscellaneous
Net Change in Expenditures
$ ( 2,300, OOO)
( 2,500, OOO)
( 600,000)
( 700,000)
1 .151,000
($ 4,949, OOO)
The revenue revisions reflected a more
pessimistic outlook on the economy as it
became apparent that a fairly significant
slowdown was developing. Revisions were
proposed to the City’s most economically
sensitive revenue categories, including Sales
Tax, Transient Occupancy Tax, Interest
Earnings, and Property Tax.
16
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
REVISED FORECAST BASE BUDGET ( CONT’D.)
These downward revisions were partially
offset by upward adjustments in a few of the
other revenue categories, including Overhead
Reimbursements, Departmental Charges, and
Licenses and Permits. The net impact of
those changes was an overall increase of $ 3.1
million from the total revenue included in the
February Forecast.
Base expenditure items were also carefully re-examined
during the time between the
February Forecast and the issuance of the
Proposed Budget. Changes to those estimates
reflected a variety of revisions to estimates
made in January, as well as the inclusion of
several new commitments made by Council
after that time. Items where cost estimates
were revised upward totaled approximately
$ 4.47 million. The most significant change
reflected an upward adjustment for health
premiums ($ 6 million) and projected
increases for bargaining group cost- of- living
increases ($ 1.7 million) in anticipation of
increased funding levels during what were
then upcoming negotiations. Actions taken
by Council during the Mid- Year Budget
Review resulted in increased expenditures of
$ 3.1 million, $ 2.5 million of which were
reimbursable by other funding sources
( including additional police resources to be
funded by the Airport and development fee
related additions in Fire and Planning,
Building and Code Enforcement).
Offsetting those increases were adjustments
to expenditure estimates for leased space for
City operations to reflect most recent
negotiations and a reallocation of vehicle
maintenance and operations costs among
funding sources that resulted in savings to the
General Fund.
PROPOSED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY
Council Direction
Specific Council direction regarding the
preparation of the Proposed Budget was
provided in the Mayor’s March Operating
Budget Message. The details of the specific
elements of that Message, along with other
Council Referrals, are provided in Attachment
B. The full text of the message itself is
contained in an appendix to this document.
In Attachment C, a status of
recommendations by the City Auditor that
had any funding impact has been included.
In addition, a number of general principles
were outlined in that document. The
following section summarizes the statements
of direction provided in the March Message
and the Administration’s approach to
implement each in the Proposed Budget.
17
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
PROPOSED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY ( CONT’D.)
Council Direction ( Co& d.)
Ditection: Maintaining Basic Services and ImulementinP Current Policv Direction - The
Proposed Budget should reflect maintenance of effort for basic services and
implement current policy direction unless otherwise directed. This includes
continuation of the City’s commitments for library funding, housing, airport
improvements, and neighborhood investments.
Response: The maintenance of basic services as well as the implementation of Council policy
direction was a priority concern in constructing the Proposed Budget. Funding to
maintain existing service levels was incorporated into the Base Budget. The
Proposed Budget reflected changing program needs and policy direction, such as
additional funding for maintenance of new facilities and parks scheduled to open
during 2001- 2002; funding for several literacy programs ( library card campaign, on-line
access); funding to enhance City streetscapes ( replacement of tulip trees,
increased sidewalk repair grant program and upgrading street tree pruning to
structural pruning); and establishment of two reserves totaling $ 9.0 million for use
by Council later during the process to support a wide array of capital investments
throughout the community that would improve safety or quality of life, or create a
better sense of pride in neighborhood communities .
Direction: Reauests for Resources - No proposals for budget augmentations should be made
without a thorough analysis of potential offsetting budget reductions or
redeployment of resources. Requests for resources to provide new or increased
services must come with clearly identified services levels ( quantity, cost, quality, and
schedule) that will be achieved. Priority consideration will be given to those
proposals that improve service with the same or fewer resources.
Response: Through the Investing in Results process, the Proposed Budget gave emphasis to
aligning the organization with the City’s seven City Service Areas, improving the
quality and timeliness of core service delivery, and enhancing accountability. All
departments were requested to look within their organizations to create capacity to
improve services before requesting additional resources. As an example, the
Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department Building’s Imaging Center
will be expanded to incorporate Public Works and Fire Department’s imaging needs.
All three departments will leverage their resources to provide a one- stop imaging
center at a much lower cost than would be required for separate operations.
18
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
PROPOSED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY ( CONT’D.)
Council Direction ( Cont’d.)
Direction: Develomne Partnerships- We should aggressively seek opportunities to provide
services or meet public needs through appropriate community partnerships, public-private
partnerships, or through leveraging City resources and investments.
Response: A concerted effort was made wherever possible in the Proposed Budget to maximize
the use of limited resources to address gaps in service delivery. The integration of
the Redevelopment Agency’s Neighborhood Investment District Program and the
City’s Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy into one program was but one example
of a working partnership. In Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services, the
department works cooperatively with community- based organizations and local
school districts in its Homework Centers, SJ BEST, and Smart Start programs in
order to offer opportunities to all members of the community.
Direction: Focus Services and Resources on the Citv’s ~ rioritv coals and results - This avoids
duplication of effort that occurs between departments. We should also look for
opportunities where services can be provided more appropriately or better by other
government agencies or other community organizations.
Response: As previously discussed, the City has undertaken a major Investing in Results effort
to ensure that departmental efforts are viewed collaboratively. In order to maximize
the City’s limited resources, services are reviewed to ensure that they are being
delivered in the most effective manner. The results of this cross- departmental effort,
which is intended to streamline operations and reduce duplication of efforts, were
prominently reflected in the Proposed Budget.
19
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
PROPOSED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY ( CONT’D.)
Fundirw Reauirements and Balanciw StratePv
As summarized in the following table, the
budget balancing strategy developed by the
Administration resulted in a balanced General
Fund Proposed Budget totaling $ 722.1
million.
2001- 2002 PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET
SOURCE OF FUNDS TO MEET TOTAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS
( in thousands)
Revised Forecast Funding Available
Additional One- time Revenue:
Available Fund Balance
Augmentation- Related Revenue
Cardroom Revenue
Transfer From Construction Excise Fund
Transfer From Sewer Sewer and Use Charge Fund
Overhead Associated with Augmentations
Other Revenue Changes
Subtotal Additional Revenue:
2001- 2002
$ 7,991
16,555
3,113
2,500
1,500
2,143
409
180
$ 26,400
Use of Earmarked Reserves: $ 5,700
Total Sources of Funds: $ 40.091
ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS
( in thousands)
2001- 2002
Proposed Budnet Fundinq Requirements:
By City Service Area:
Aviation
Environmental & Utility Services
Economic & Neighborhood Development
Public Safety
Recreation & Cultural Services
Transportation
Strategic Support
City- Wide ( Other, Reserves/ Additional General Revenue)
$ 0
1,017
6,745
5,615
9,605
3,855
6,288
6.966
Ongoing
$ 7,991
0
2,216
0
i
409
180
$ 2,805
$ 3,730
$ 14,526
Onaoinn
$
( :,
4,310
1,847
2,971
1,351
2,145
1,911
Total Fundinq Requirements: $ 40,091 $ 14,526
Remaining Balance: $ 0s 0
20
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
PROPOSED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY ( CONT’D.)
Descrktion of Balanciw Actions
Following is a brief discussion of the key
elements of the budget balancing actions that
were included in the Proposed Budget.
Available Fund Balance
The unrestricted portion of the 2000- 2001
Ending/ 2001 - 2002 Beginning Fund Balance
estimate was adjusted upward from earlier
estimates by $ 22.3 million, freeing a
significant amount of one- time funds for
allocation. The majority of the increase
reflected a net upward adjustment in the
2000- 2001 fiscal year to projections for excess
revenue and expenditure savings ($ 16.0
million) based primarily on stronger than
anticipated revenue performance in several
categories, including Sales Tax, Property Tax,
Motor Vehicle In- Lieu, Interest Earnings, and
Overhead Reimbursements.
This category also reflected the carryover and
liquidation of unspent 2000- 2001 Earmarked
Reserves ($ 5.7 million). Included were the
following: Enhanced Parks Maintenance
Reserve ( 46.4 million), and portions of the
Planning Fee Reserve ($ 1.3 million), the
Building Fee Reserve ($ 3.0 million), the Fire
Fee Reserve ($ 15 million), and the Public
Works Fee Reserve 0.9 million).
Augmentation- Related Revenue
Reimbursements from various local and State
grant prog= s, and transfers and
reimbursements from other funds and
agencies were reflected along with
corresponding budget augmentations. This
included reimbursement from the
Redevelopment Agency for several Strong
Neighborhoods Initiative efforts, and grant
funds from the state to enhance library
services. In addition, cost- recovery fees were
used to fund additions, primarily in the Public
Works and Fire Development Fee Programs.
Cardroom Revenue
In accordance with Council direction to
reduce the City’s ongoing reliance on
cardroom revenue, a portion of this revenue
($ 2.5 million) was allocated to meet one- time
needs. The remaining $ 5 million estimated
from this revenue source continued to be
utilized as a general revenue source.
Transfers from Construction Excise Tax
Fund and the Sewer Service and Use
Charge Fund
As was also included in the Proposed Capital
Budget, Construction Excise Tax Funds
totaling $ 1.5 million were left uncommitted
and recommended for transfer as one- time
funding to the General Fund. In addition, a
one- time transfer of prior year interest
earnings from the Sewer Service and Use
Charge Fund ($ 2.13 million) was
recommended for transfer in response to an
audit recommendation. These funds were
used to support a number of one- time
additions in the Proposed Budget.
21
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
PROPOSED BUDGET BALANCING STMTEGY ( CONT’D.)
Description of Balancing Actions ( Cont’d.)
Overhead Associated with Augmentations Other Revenue Changes
Additional overhead accrued to the General
Fund from the addition of positions in special
fund departments, such as Airport and
Conventions and Cultural Affairs. Over half
of the increase in overhead was generated
from the Airport Department.
Also included as recommended balancing
actions in the Proposed Budget were a variety
of smaller revenue increases totaling $ 180,000.
For example, several minor fees and charges
revisions to maintain approved cost recovery
levels were approved and resulted in
additional revenue for 2001- 2002.
ADOPTED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY
The final phase of the 2001- 2002 budget
process commenced following the issuance of
the City Manager’s Proposed Budget
document and consisted of the following
major steps: review by the Council in
Committee of the Whole sessions of the
Proposed Budget; issuance by Administration
of recommended revisions to the Proposed
Budget ( in the form of formal Manager’s
Budget Addendum’s, or MBAs); issuance by
the Mayor in June of his Final Budget
Modifications memorandum; and approval by
the Council of a final Adopted Budget. A
significant number of revisions to the
Proposed Budget occurred in this final phase
of the process and are described in the
following section.
Fundinq Requirements and Balancing Strateqy
Summarized in the following table by general
category are the additional funding
requirements introduced by Manager’s Budget
Addendum’s or the Mayor’s Final Budget
Modifications memorandum. ( Full text is
included as an Appendix to this document.)
Those additional requirements totaled $ 95.05
million. By far the largest component of the
increase were rebudgets ($ 92,770,900) to be
carried forward from 2000- 2001, as
recommended by the Administration.
Detailed descriptions of the changes and
investments that were approved are provided
in the specific department sections of this
document.
22
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
ADOPTED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY ( CONT’D.)
Fundiw Reauirements and Balanciw StratePv ( Cont’d.)
2001- 2002 ADOPTED OPERATING BUDGET
SOURCE OF FUNDS TO MEET TOTAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS
( in thousands)
Fund Balance Increases
Savings to Support 2000- 2001 Projects
Subtotal Fund Balance Increases:
Additional Revenue
Augmentation Related Revenue
Other Revenue Changes
Subtotal Additional Revenue:
Use of Earmarked Reserves:
Reserve for Neighborhood investment Fund
Reserve for Future Allocation
Subtotal Use of Reserves:
Total Additional Sources of Funding
2001- 2002
$
90,250
2,281
2,521
4,802
6,000
2,799
$ 8,799
$ 103,851
ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS
( in thousands)
Adopted Budget Funding Requirements
By City Service Area:
Economic & Neighborhood Development
Public Safety
Recreation & Cuiturai Services
Transportation
Subtotal
Rebudgeted 2000- 2001 Projects 92,771 0
Total Additional Funding Actions $ 103,851 $ 1,047
Remaining Balance: $ 0 $ 0
Ongoing
$
577
0
577
470
$ 470
$ 1,047
$ 1
577 577
779 542
7,229 ( 72)
2,495 0
$ 11,080 $ 1.047
23
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
ADOPTED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY ( CONT’D.)
DescriDtion of Balanciw Actions
Following is a brief discussion of the key
elements of the budget balancing actions.
Savings to Support 2000- 2001 Projects
The unrestricted portion of the 2000- 2001
Ending/ 2001- 2002 Beginning Fund Balance
estimate was adjusted upward from earlier
estimates by an additional $ 90.2 million to
reflect 2000- 2001 funding which is available
to be carried to 2001- 2002 to complete prior
year programs from projects that were either
delayed or not fully implemented during
2000- 2001.
Augmentation- Related Revenue
Reimbursements from the City of San
Jose/ County of Santa Clara Joint Powers
Authority ($ 1,703,972) and revenues that
resulted from increases to fees in the Building
($ 300,000) and Planning ($ 277,315) programs
were reflected along with corresponding
budget augmentations.
Other Revenue Changes
Reimbursements from various local, State and
federal grant programs which were awarded,
but not received in 2000- 2001 were reflected
along with corresponding budget changes.
This included reimbursement for various
environmental, public safety, and healthy
neighborhood activities.
Reserve for Neighborhood Investment
Fund and Reserve for Future Allocation
Reflects the elimination/ utilization of the
Reserve for Neighborhood Investment Fund
($ 6.0 million) and Reserve for Future
Allocation ($ 2,799,351). These reserves were
established in the proposed process to be
used during this phase of the budget process
to support a wide array of capital investments
throughout the community to improve safety
or quality of life, or to create a better sense of
pride in neighborhood communities.
Adopted Budget Funding Requirements
by City Service Area
The following highlights some of the more
significant General Fund augmentations that
were approved in the final phase of the
process and have been grouped by City
Service Area.
Economic and Neighborhood Development ( 3.57
million) - Increases to fees in the Planning
and Building Fee Programs provided funding
for a position to ensure conformance with
private development plans from project
approval through construction ($ 106,000). In
addition, funding was restored to Planning
($ 171,000) and Building ($ 300,000) fee
reserves that were used to fund proposed
augmentations in the development program.
Public S+ g ($ 78 million) - Funding for
expanding the City’s efforts against domestic
violence ($ 60,000) and Safe Campus Initiative
Emergency Response ($ 150,000) efforts;
expansion of the Fire Department’s resources
for paramedic certification ($ 300,000), public
education program ($ 100,000) and creation of
a Wildland Interface Program Manager
($ 142,000); and establishment of an internet
predator awareness program ($ 16,000).
24
Attachment A
Reconciling General Fund Budget Actions ( Cont’d.)
ADOPTED BUDGET BALANCING STRATEGY ( CONT’D.)
DescriDtion of Balancinp Actions ( Cont’d.)
Recreation and Cz& maal Services ($ 7.23 million) -
Significant funding for various capital
improvements to neighborhood parks,
community and school facilities and trails
($ 4.58 million). Major projects include West
Valley Library ($ 491,000), Almaden Winery
Community Center ($ 1,033,000), and a new
community park at Floyd and Locust Streets
($ 400,000). In addition, funding was also
approved for bridging the Digital Divide
upon completion of the Digital Divide
Blueprint ($ 600,000); conducting a Senior
Needs Assessment ($ 150,000); and a number
of allocations to community- based
organizations to address needs in various
segments of the community funded by the
City of San Jose/ County of Santa Clara Joint
Powers Authority ($ 1,693,000).
Traqbotiation ($ 2.49 million) - Significant
funding for various capital improvements to
City streets ($ 4.58 million). Major projects
include Santa Teresa Median Island
Landscaping ($ 460,000), Streetscape
Improvements at Boynton Avenue and
Stevens Creek Boulevard ($ 362,000),
streetlighting improvements in council
District 5 schools ($ 372,000), and
construction of sidewalks along Abom Square
Loop ($ 333,000).
Rebudgeted 2000- 2001 Projects
The rebudgeting of $ 92.771 million in
unspent 2000- 2001 allocations for completion
of programs and projects authorized in the
prior year was included. The largest majority
of the rebudgets occurred in three areas:
Capital ($ 33.649 million), Earmarked Reserves
($ 30.558 million), and City- wide ($ 20.650
million).
25
Attachment B
Status of Mayor and City Council Referrals
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
Referral Resolution
Airport Noise Mitigation
Low or No Emission Shuttle Buses
Airport Customer Service Program
Permanently secure open space for future
generations
Redevelopment Funds for Housing for Funding of $ 10.0 million included in the Adopted
Extremely Low Income households Budget.
Increased Staffing in. Planning and Building Addition of approximately $ 4.5 million in staffing
and non- personal/ equipment to handle workload
and restore service levels included in the Adopted
Budget.
Homeless Families and Children Initiative
Fund
Housing Production Team Recommendations
Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Repair Program
Streetlight Installation- Annual Level of
Service
Streetlight Installations with No Funding
Allocation of $ 11.8 million in Noise Mitigation
activities is included in the Adopted Budget.
Airport has undertaken a program to replace its
current shuttle fleet with compressed natural gas
( CNG) buses in order to improve air quality.
Funding included to implement a comprehensive
customer service- training and communications
program.
Funding of $ 1 . O million included in the Adopted
Budget. Report was issued during budget
process.
Allocation of $ 300,000 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Allocation included in the Adopted Budget to
fund activities and meet timetables related to the
Housing Team recommendations.
Funding of $ 2.0 million included in the Adopted
Budget.
Program is now an annual level of service, which
will result in reducing backlogs.
Funding for streetlights and backlog ($ 500,000)
included for streetlight installation requests that
currently have no identified funding.
26
Attachment B
Siairrs ofMayor and City Courrcil Reiimals
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
Referral Resolution
Street Tree Trimming
Inventory for Unlandscaped Median Islands,
and Cost Estimates for Improving Them
Graffiti Response Reduced from 78 to 48-
hours
SNI Code Enforcement Response
Vehicle Abatement Program
Downtown Parking Improvements
Convention Services Improvements
Neighborhood Investment Fund
Neighborhood Clean- Up Program Expansion
Discharge Permit Requirements
Recycle Plus! Program Transition
Home Energy Assistance Program
Allocation of $ 669,000 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Report issued during the budget process which
resulted in funding to address a portion of the
inventory.
Allocation of $ 242,000 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Allocation of $ 340,000 included in the Adopted
Budget to meet response targets.
Funding of $ 286,000 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Adopted Budget addresses need to improve
access to available parking in the Downtown.
Additional stafhng approved to increase the level
of service to customers.
Funding of $ 6.0 million included in the Adopted
Budget for specific neighborhood improvements.
Allocation of $ 142,390 for a fifth set of clean- ups
included in the Adopted Budget.
Funding of $ 75,000 included in the Adopted
Budget-
Allocation of $ 1.8 million for informational
campaign included in the Adopted Budget.
Funding of $ 1 . O million for low- income assistance
included in the Adopted Budget.
27
Attachment B
Status of Mayor and City Council Referrals
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
Referral Resolution
Safe Schools Campus Initiative- Second Year Funding approved to improve existing emergency
response at school campuses and for second year
phase- in of program to expand Safe Schools
Campus Initiative to include all San Jose middle
schools.
Domestic Violence Program Expansion
Equipment or Materials for Safer Service to
Public Safety Staff and City Residents
Safety Education and Training Programs
communityP olicing
Fire Services Strategic Plan Implementation
Fire Department Courier Services
Public CPR Tra. ining and Purchase of
Additional Defibrillators for Public Facilities
Smart Start Centers
Homework Center Expansion
Allocation of funds included in the Adopted
Budget to explore opportunities to improve and
expand Domestic Violence programs.
Funding allocated in the Adopted Budget for
several categories of equipment.
Adopted Budget includes funding for continuing
and enhancing strong safety- training programs for
employees.
Addition of 8 officers for expanded Community
Policing Center hours is included in the Adopted
Budget ($ 845,000).
Adopted Budget includes additional analytical and
technological staff resources, and provides $ 2.7
million for apparatus and equipment.
Adopted Budget establishes a $ 114,000 reserve
for efforts to be determined.
Allocation of funds included in the Adopted
Budget for public CPR & n. ing and training in
fire, life safety and emergency preparedness, and
for the purchase of additional public facilities
defibrillators.
Allocation of $ 1.4 million included in the
Adopted Budget.
Funding of $ 640,000 included in the Adopted
Budget.
28
Referral
Attachment B
Siatm of LmiJw’ and city Counc= il Rekrrais
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
Resolution
Future Teacher Scholarship Program
SAGE Expansion from 4: 00 p. m. to 6: 00 p. m.
Park Maintenance and Operations Associated Over $ 400,000 in additional program funding
with Increased Acres included to increase the level of service.
Alum Rock Park Access Funds included in the Capital Improvement Plan.
Library Card Campaign- 3”’ Year Funding Allocation of $ 140,300 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Library Service Innovations/ Hours Review
Arts Venture Fund Contribution
Mexican Heritage Stabilization Program
New Year’s Eve Carnival Annual Event
Expand Senior Centers, Adult Mental Health
Programs and Disabled Swim Programs
Multi- Year Phase- Out of Card Club Revenue
Support of the General Fund
Follow Approved Capital Budgeting Methods
Allocation of $ 100,000 included in the Adopted
Budget to double the number of scholarships.
No additional funding included. Approximately
one- half of all SAGE sites already have extended
hours.
Funding of $ 616,400 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Allocation of $ 250,000 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Funding of $ 500,000 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Allocation of $ 50,000 included in the Adopted
Budget.
Funding for expanded senior programs included
in the Healthy Neighborhood Venture Fund.
Funding for an additional position for Adult
Mental Health Services included in the General
Fund.
A total of $ 2.5 million of the Card Club Revenue
set aside for one- time uses to reduce the financial
dependence on gambling revenues.
Planning and budgeting of Capital projects based
on approved Capital Budget methods.
29
Attachment B
Status of Mayor and City Council Referrals
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
Referral Resolution
Make Government Services More Accessible
Online
Allocation of $ 2.0 million included in the
Adopted Budget. Specific recommendations for
the use of these funds will follow early in the
fiscal year.
Plans and Budget Strategies Addressed for
Deferred Maintenance
Street Maintenance and Reconstruction
Traffic Signals Maintenance
Traffic Calming
30
Funding of $ 1.05 million included in the Adopted
Budget.
Over $ 27.0 million in Capital funds for street
maintenance included in the Adopted Budget, as
well as ongoing operating monies.
Additional allocation of $ 483,000 included in the
Adopted Budget for signal maintenance.
Funding of $ 5.0 million included in the Adopted
Budget.
Attachment C
Status of City Auditor Recomendations With Fwding Impact
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
Department Item Status Remarks
Environmental WPCP In- Lieu Fees and Included
Services Interest Transfers ( 99- 04, # 5,
# 6 and # 12)
Finance Business Tax Collection Included
Process - Review Need For
Addition Staff and Non-
Personal Funding ( 96- 06, # 2,
W
Fire
Utility Billing System Staffing Not Included
( 97- 01, # 3)
Sewer Billing - Review Not Included
Combining with Recycle Plus!
Billings ( 97- 01, # 4 and 99- 04,
# 14)
Master Vendor File
Improvements ( 00- 02, # 3)
Not Included
Hazardous Materials Storage Not Included
Permit Fees ( 93- 04, # l)
WPCP In- Lieu Fees revised
per Audit findings. A total
of $ 2.1 million transferred
from Sewer Service and Use
Charge Fund for pre-
Proposition 218 interest
earnings.
No additional resources
requested by department.
The new billing system will
be operational in early 2002.
At that time, the service
capabilities of the third party
contractor and the future
direction of the program can
be evaluated.
Issue under discussion with
the County. Feasibility
analysis will be completed by
December 2002.
Under consideration for
implementation with existing
funds.
Reviewed, but not included
due to detrimental impact on
potential fee payers.
31
Attachment C
Status of City Auditor Recommendations With Funding Impact
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
Department Item Status Remarks
Police Property and Evidence Unit - Included Existing system will be
Establish input controls for absorbed into the
EVITRAX Property Tracking Automated Information
System ( 92- 09, # 6) System ( AIS) by November
2001.
Police Staffkg and Included Funded in 2000- 2001
Deployment Software ( 00- 01, Budget.
W
32
D
Community
Profile
Sun lost! is the corporate, jnancia& government, and m! turaL center of Silicon Vahy, the worldkpre- eminent concentration
$ ffhz$ tecbnol'og bu- ti. ne. x
FOUNDED
1777; California’s first civilian settlement.
INCORPORATED
March 27,1850, California’s fist incorporated city, and site of first state capital.
FORM OF GOVERNMENT
Council- Manager. The City Council consists of 10 council members elected by district and a Mayor
elected at large.
STRATEGIC LOCATION
Situated between the Diablo and Santa Cruz mountain ranges, the City of San Jose encompasses 175
square miles at the southern tip of San Francisco Bay.
San Jose’s central location between San Francisco to the north and Monterey/ Carmel to the south makes
the Capital of Silicon Valley a gateway to adventures throughout California.
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA’S LARGEST CITY
San Jose is the largest city in northern California, third largest in California and
on the West Coast, and eleventh largest in the nation.
CITY OF
SANJOSE
With a population of 894,943, San Jose is larger than San Francisco, Boston,
Washington D. C., Seattle, Miami, Denver, and New Orleans.
CAPITAL’ OF SILICON VALLEY More then 1.6 million people reside in Santa Clara County, of which San Jose
is the county seat.
QUALITY OF LIFE
As a place to live and do business, San Jose has received accolades from Fortune Magazine, California
Business, Hispanic Inc., Money, Outlook and other national media.
San Jose has the lowest crime rate index among the 50 largest cities in the nation.
Silicon Valley has the most highly educated workforce in the nation with Stanford, San Jose State
University, Santa Clara University, and local community colleges around the city.
San Jose ranks second in the United States based on median household effective buying income ($ 61,122).
INTERNATIONAL
On the international front, San Jose, second only to Seattle, is one of the fastest growing major export
areas in the country.
The San Jose Metropolitan area represents one- quarter of California’s total exports, yet make- up only 5%
of the State’s population.
The area is rich with Research and Development resources and typically receives between one- quarter and
one- half of the nations venture capital.
Fortg- two percent of San Jose Metro Area’s workforce has a college degree, the highest percentage in the
nation.
CITY OF SAN JOSIk
ROSTER OF ELECTED OFFICIALS
CITY OF SAN JOSk
COUNCIL DISTRICTS
COUNCIL. MEETINGS
Council meetings are scheduled every
Tuesday at 1: 30 p. m. in the Council Chambers
located at 801 North First Street.
@ Evening meetings at 7: 00 p. m. in addition to the
afternoon meeting on the lst and 3rd Tuesdays.
0 Closed sessions every Tuesday at 9: 30 a. m. in the
Mayor’s conference room.
ON o meetings are held in July when the Council is in recess.
Ron Gonzales Mayor 277- 4237
Linda J. LeZotte 1 277- 5438
Forrest Williams 2 277- 4282
Cindy Chavez 3 277- 5231
Chuck Reed 4 277- 5320
Nota Campos 5 277- 5157
Ken Yeager 6 277- 5166
GSehoirragkea wa, Jr.
DCaovrtide seD .
John Diquisto
7 277- 5226
8 277- 5242
9 277- 5275
Pat Dando 10 277- 525 7
CITY OF SAN JOSE
CITY ORGANIZATION
RESIDENTS
OF SAN JOSE I
I
BOARDS AND Office of
COMMISSIONS MAYOR AND REDEVELOPMENT
CITY COUNCIL AGENCY
I
\
GENE% AL
GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENTS
Finance
Human
Resources
Information
Technology
PUBLIC
SAFETY
DEPARTMENTS
Fire
Police
Budget Office
lYi!” P“~ nIn” n** mYi” P
Development
Emergency Services
Employee Relations
Equality Assurance
Intergovernmental
Relations
Public Outreach
QUEST Partnership
Office of
INDEPENDENT
POLICE AUDITOR I
CAPITAL
- NANCE
DEPARTMENTS
General Services
Public Works
Transportation
I
COMMUNITY
SERVICES
3EPARTMENTS
AilpOrt
Conventions,
AItS&
93tertainment
?= nvironmental
Services
Housing
Library
Parks,
Recreation &
Neighborhood
Services
Planning,
Building &
Code
Enforcement
L
CITY OF SAN JOSE
ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS
RESIDENTS
MAYOR
& CITY COUNCIL
ClTY
ADMINISTRATION
Final City Council Budget Adoption
D
2001- 2002
Budget Guide
CITY OF SAN Josfi
BUDGET GUIDE
The Operating Budget document includes the City Manager’s Budget Message, outlining major
policy issues and changes to City programs. Summaries of expected revenues and expenditures are
then presented, along with comparative historical information and five- year trends in General Fund
revenues, expenditures, and staffing. The Budget Policies and Practices as well as assumptions
used to develop revenue projections are also presented.
Implementation of Performance- Based Budgeting
City Service Areas
City Service Areas ( CSAs) align services provided in individual departments into the City’s seven key
lines of business as viewed from the community’s perspective. A, collection of core services from
various partner deparunents, CSAs show the results of the collaboration among the departments at a
higher organizational level:
l Aviation
l Economic and Neighborhood Development
l Environmental and Utility Services
l Public Safety
l Recreation and Cultural Services
l Transportation
l Strategic Support
Strategic Support represents functions that provide organization- wide guidance and support to
enable the delivery of the City’s direct services.
The City Service Area ( CSA) section includes an introductory overview of the CSA concept,
structure and role in strategic planning and cross- departmental management of service delivery.
Individual sections on each of the seven CSAs follow, providing a summary of the CSA’s Business
Plan including highlights of the CSA’s strategic goals and investment strategy, current and planned
performance, and recommended investments to achieve CSA outcomes.
Departments
Next, the City Department sections are presented, organized alphabetically for 2001- 2002. The
sections below describe the information provided for each department:
Synopsis of Performance- Based Budgeting Transitional Format
The 2001- 2002 Adopted Budget reflects the second year of the three- year transition of all
departments to a performance- based presentation. As the first step in the transition to a
performance- based budget, all departments and City Council appointees identified their major lines
I- l
CITY OF SANJosk
BUDGET GUIDE
of business or “ Core Services” delivered to customers. Department budget sections are now
presented by Core Service, with newly- developed performance measures for each. The Core Service
sections include descriptions of budget changes by CSA outcome and performance results
anticipated.
Each department section begins with a brief synopsis of the department, including the mission
statement, Core Service Chart, Budget Summary, Budget Highlights for 2001- 2002, and a
Budget Byte ( a graph or chart) that describes one or more of the department’s key indicators or
performance measures. The purpose of the Budget Byte is to communicate key information to
support the overall performance and resource discussion for the department such as growth in
demand, progress toward multi- year goals, or benchmarking comparisons.
This department synopsis is followed by a Department Overview that addresses key policy and
service delivery issues from the department ( i. e., organization) point of view. The Department
Overview also portrays how the department and each of its Core Services align to City Service Areas
and contribute to CSA Business Plan outcomes and strategic goals.
The narrative overview is followed by a Department Budget Summary, which is a table that
reflects funding by category, program, and funding source for four separate points in time: Actual
Expenditures for 1999- 2000, Adopted Budget for 2000- 2001, the 2001- 2002 Forecast ( Base Budget),
and the 2001- 2002 Adopted Budget. As noted in each table, a breakdown of the total department
budget by Core Service is still in progress and will be developed in time for the 2002- 2003 budget
process. In the interim, the breakdown of department budget amounts is provided by department
organizational program and by City fund. Total Authorized Positions are also provided. The
departmental overview ends with a Budget Reconciliation showing sign& ant Base Budget
adjustments ( such as negotiated salary and benefit changes and contractual obligations) from the
prior year’s Adopted Budget and a listing of Investments Approved for 2001- 2002.
Core Service and Core Service Purpose Statement
Core Services represent the major lines of business conducted by departments. Core Services were
developed during 1999- 2000 by engaging departmental staff at all levels, as well as the public, in
discussion of the department’s major services and mission. The results of those discussions were
reviewed by the City Council in December 1999 ( Milestone I of the “ Investing in Results” effort)
and are used to align departmental services with related performance and resources for budgeting
and management decision- making.
Each department also presents a Strategic Support section, describing the various leadership and
support functions that provide guidance and assistance in delivery of one or more of the
department’s core services.
The Core Service Purpose is a brief statement of why the Core Service exists, such as “ To contain,
control, and extinguish hostile fires with minimal loss of life and property.” ( Fire Suppression). The
statement unifies the various operational services provided and activities performed.
I- 2
CITY OF SANJoS&
BUDGET GUIDE
Key Operational Services
This section lists titles of specific operational services delivered within the Core Service.
Performance and Resource Overview
This narrative section explains the performance results and expenditures for the current fiscal year,
any changes approved for the next year, and the anticipated costs and results of the proposed
changes, if any. The narrative should answer the following questions:
What does the performance information show ? Reasons for variances between targets and
actuals/ estimates or further explanation of the meaning of the targets and levels of service are
included.
Why is performance at that level? The narrative explains the reasons behind the numbers.
Also, if a measure averages the response times or costs of several different operations, the
explanation will detail which areas are driving the average up or down and why.
What is being done to address any identified performance issues? The narrative will note
any productivity efforts, technology or systems changes to be implemented towards this end.
What will be the result of the approved changes ? Finally, the anticipated impacts of budget
changes will be translated into the performance or activity targets for the next fiscal year. The
approved changes should be related to performance at some level, ‘ even if the overall
performance measures will not be affected. For example, if an addition is approved to maintain
current service levels, the narrative should note that demand or workload is increasing, and
without such an addition, performance could deteriorate.
How will Core Service efforts contribute to relevant City Service Atea Outcomes, Goals
and Performance Targets as set forth in CSA Business Plans? Where applicable, the
connection should be made between Business Plan strategies and front- line service delivery.
Any other narrative information that is of interest in the context of performance or resources also
may be discussed in this section, including what major issues will be faced by the Core Service in the
next fiscal year.
If necessary, this subheading of the Performance and Resource Overview will indicate and provide a
rationale for any Core Service performance measures revised since the prior year’s budget
document.
I- 3
CITY OF SANJOSIS:
BUDGET GUIDE
Performance Summary
This section presents the measures and data to be used in evaluating Core Service results. Most
Core Services will include measurements developed to describe the results expected in the four key
measurement areas:
@ Quality - How well is the service doing what it is intended to do?
Et3 c ost - What resources are used to achieve results?
UB Cycle Time - Timeliness of service delivery.
Customer Satisfaction - How customers view the City’s service efforts.
Attempts were made to limit the total number of measures shown by combining similar types, such
as Customer Satisfaction measures for all operational services within the Core Service. If an
operational service’s performance needs to be discussed separately to explain the overall Core
Service performance, this is described in the Performance and Resource Overview narrative.
Note: Performance measures are not generally reported for departments’ Strategic Support
functions, unless, by exception, to present performance information that cannot otherwise be
communicated through Core Service results measures.
Activity and Workload Highlights
This section highlights the scope and extent of the workload demand and the activities completed.
For example, while the Performance Summary section focuses on percentages of workload
accomplished successfully, the Activity and Workload section may provide a count of the total
workload attempted/ completed.
Resource Summary
Bzldget in@ mation Ly Core Service wi& be inch& d onb in the Tranqortation Department as we,?, a? s the Parks,
Recreation and Neighborhood Services Department far 200 l- 2002. Other departments wiL? inchde budget
info07mation & Core Sentice beginning in 2002- 2003.
The Resource Summary is the budget information section. The hrst part illustrates the costs and
budget for each Core Service provided. The second part reflects the Operating Budget and costs by
category of expenditure, including personal services, non- personal/ equipment, or other operating
expenditures, such as grants. Non- departmental operating expenditures may be included, such as
City- Wide allocations, and are clearly labeled as such. Also, any Capital Budget allocations used in
the program will be included ( and clearly labeled) if those resources are used to produce the
I- 4
CITY OF SAN Josk
BUDGET GUIDE
performance results. The third part illustrates the authorized positions assigned to the Core Service.
These position figures include full- time and part- time permanent positions.
Budget Changes Section
This section provides the details of adopted Budget Changes by Core Service for 2001- 2002.
Included for each change is a description of what is to be added or deleted, the need for the
approved change, the amount and nature of the funding involved, and performance results expected
to occur if the proposal is implemented. The Performance Results are intended to describe, in
quantitative terms wherever possible, the expected “ return on investment” when the change is
approved. This information is characterized by one or more of the four key measurement areas:
Quality, Cost, Cycle Time, Customer Satisfaction.
Organization of the Budget Changes Section ( New for 2001- 2002)
To illustrate the connection to the CSA Business Plans, the Budget Changes are grouped to show
their contribution to the goals and outcomes of the various CSAs. Within each Core Service, Budget
proposals will be grouped under the CSA Outcome to which they contribute.
City- Wide Expenses
This section of the budget includes allocations that relate to more than one department or are not
directly associated with ongoing departmental operations. For 2001- 2002, City- Wide Expenses were
re- categorized to align to the CSAs to which they primarily contribute. General Fund Reserves,
Transfers and Capital budget information is also located in this section.
Inter- Departmental Programs
This section was added to the department- style written summaries for certain special funds ( the
Community Development Block Grant, Healthy Neighborhoods Venture, Integrated Waste
Management, Sewer Service and Use Charge, Storm Sewer Operating, and Transient Occupancy
Tax Funds). These funds support activities in several departments. Each summary provides an
overview of the fund’s status, detail on the major areas of each fund’s sources and uses, and
performance and service delivery issues for the upcoming year.
Detail of Departmental Positions
The Departmental Position Summary details the authorized positions and provides a two- year
history of changes.
Source and Use Statements
These statements detail projected revenues, expenditures, and fund balances included for all
budgeted operating funds.
I- 5
CITY OF SAN JOSh
BUDGET GUIDE
Glossary of Terms
Appropriation
The legal authorization granted by the City
Council to the Administration to make
expenditures and incur obligations for
purposes specified in the Appropriation
Ordinance.
Base Budget
Ongoing expense level necessary to
maintain service levels previously
authorized by the City Council.
Business Plan
A strategic planning tool, including a short-term
action plan, used to guide the
evaluation and prioritization of service
delivery needs, the allocation of resources,
and the measurement of results. CSA
Business Plans have a five- year planning
horizon to project long- term service
priorities and needs as well as the CSA’s
planned response to address those needs.
Each CSA Business Plan contains a one-year
Action Plan specifying the actions to
be accomplished and the performance
targets to be achieved given the allocated
resources.
Capital Budget
A fYinancia. l plan of capital projects and the
means of financing them for a given period
of time.
Capital Improvement Program ( Five- Year)
A plan, separate from the annual budget,
which identifies all capital projects to be
undertaken during a five- year period along
with cost estimates, method of financing,
and a recommended schedule for
completion.
Carryover
Unspent funds, either encumbered,
reserved, or unobligated, brought forward
from prior fiscal years.
City Service Area ( CSA)
City Service Areas integrate Core Services
provided by individual departments into the
City’s key lines of business, as viewed from
the community’s perspective. A collection
of Core Services from various partner
departments, CSAs enable us to plan and
show results of the collaboration among the
departments at a higher organizational level.
There are seven CSAs, six of which deliver
direct services. The seventh, Strategic
Support, represents functions that provide
guidance and support contributing to the
delivery of direct services.
CSA Partners
Primary ( or internal) Partners include
those departments with Core Services most
directly responsible for overall CSA service
delivery. Contributing Partners include
departments with operational services that
contribute indirectly to CSA service
delivery. External Parmers include
organizations outside the City that
collaborate with or complement City efforts
toward achieving CSA outcomes.
Community Indicator
Data used to describe the broad context of
physical, environmental, economic, social,
or other conditions. Community Indicators
relate information about the state of the
policy and service delivery environment that
assist in determining needs and progress
toward achieving the City’s selected
Outcomes.
Contingency Reserve
An appropriation of funds to cover
unforeseen events during the budget year,
such as floods, emergencies, newly required
programs, shortfalls in revenue or other
eventualities.
I- 6
i i
CITY OF SANJOSfi
BUDGET GUIDE
/ :
Glossary of Terms ( Cont’d.)
Contractual Services
Operating expenditures for services
provided by outside organizations and
businesses, including maintenance
contracts, management services, etc.
Core Services
The City departments’ key lines of business.
Core Services produce the primary
deliverables of a department.
Debt Service
The amount required to pay interest on and
to retire the principal of outstanding debt.
Encumbrance
Financial obligations such as purchase
orders, contracts, or commitments which
are chargeable to an appropriation and for
which a portion of the appropriation is
reserved.
Equipment
An item having a unit cost of $ 5,000 or
more and an estimated useful life of more
than one year.
Fiscal Year
A 12- month accounting period to which the
annual budget applies; for San Jose, it is the
period from July 1 through June 30.
Fund
An independent fiscal and accounting entity
used to account for all financial transactions
related to the specific purpose for which the
fund was created by ordinance.
Fund Balance
The difference between total receipts and
total expenditures over time.
General Fund
The primary operating fund used to account
for ail the revenues and expenditures of the
City which are not related to special or
capital funds.
Infrastructure Management System ( IMS)
The City’s computerized system used to
identify the condition of streets, sewers and
other infrastructure, forecast maintenance
needs and project future replacement
expenditures.
Interfund Transfers
Transfers between funds to account for
reimbursements for services, overhead
expenses, or other payments.
Investing in Results
The City’s service delivery framework that
aligns City services with desired results for
the community, using performance
measures to track progress, make
improvements and guide investment
decisions
Mission
A unifying statement of why an
organization exists.
Non- Personal Expenses
Operating costs which are not related to
equipment items or personnel.
Ongoing Cost/ Savings
The 1Zmonth value of partial year
additions or reductions.
Operating Budget
A fmancial plan for the provision of direct
services and support functions.
I- 7
CITY OF SAN JO&
BUDGET GUIDE
Glossary of Terms ( Cont’d.)
Operational Services
Elements of Core Services, necessary to
accomplish the Core Services of the
organization. The “ front line” of service
delivery.
Outcome
A desirable overall condition, or “ Picture of
Success”. At the City Service Area level, the
specified outcomes are the “ ends” toward
which the plans, efforts, resources and
results of the CSA are directed.
Performance Measure
Measures the results of services delivered to
customers. Performance measures fall into
the four Key Measurement Areas of
Quality, Cost, Cycle Time, and Customer
Satisfaction. Performance Measures are
developed at the CSA, Core Service, and
Operational Service levels.
Performance Measure Goals/ Targets
Quantitative benchmarks for each
Performance Measure. PM Goals
represent the optimum performance level,
or the long- range ( typically 5 years out),
planned level of performance identified in
the CSA Business Plan. PM Targets, for
CSA’s and departmental Core Services,
represent the one- year performance level
commitment, given allocated resources.
Personal Services
Salary and fringe benefit costs of City
employees.
Rebudget
Unspent or unencumbered prior year funds
reauthorized for the same purpose as
previously approved, usually as a result of
delayed program implementation.
Reserve
Funds budgeted for a particular purpose but
not authorized for immediate obligation.
Special Purpose Funds
Funds, exclusive of the General Fund and
capital funds, which are separately
administered because they are associated
with a distinct function or enterprise.
Strategic Goals/ Objectives
Represent elements or sub- elements of a
strategic plan. The City’s planned response
to address service delivery needs and
priorities. Strategic goals and objectives are
guided by the related Outcomes and
Community Indicators, but represent only
the City’s contribution toward those
Outcomes and Indicators. Strategic goals
and objectives also determine how the i
City’s Core Services, Operational Services,
and special projects should be aligned and
directed toward producing the planned
service delivery response.
Strategic Support
Includes various functions that support
and/ or guide delivery of Core Services.
Examples include financial and human
resources administration, purchasing and
training as well as strategic leadership and
policy development.
Values
Values guide behavior in carrying out the
work of the organization.
Vision
A guiding statement describing a desirable
future state toward which efforts should be
directed. An effective vision statement
inspires creativity while keeping an
organization “ on track” for the future by
aligning its priorities.
I- 8
CITY OF SANJOSB
BUDGET 6UIDE
Fund Descriptions
Special Revenue Funds
Arterial and Major Collectors Fund
Accounts for the collection of monies owed by developers for previously completed street
improvements.
Benefit Funds
Consist of the Dental Insurance, Life Insurance, Unemployment Insurance and Employee Benefit Funds.
These funds account for the provision and hnancing of benefits to City employees, retirees, and their
dependents.
Business Improvement District Fund
Accounts for assessments involving Business Improvement District activities.
Building and Structure Construction Tax Fund
Tax on residential, commercial, and industrial development. The use of these funds, along with grant
revenues, is restricted to traffic capital improvements on major arterials and collectors, including bridges,
culverts, lighting and traffic control systems which increase traffic volume.
Cash Reserve Fund
Revolving fund for the payment of authorized expenditures for any fiscal year in anticipation of and
before the collection of taxes and other revenues for such fiscal year, and for payment of authorized
expenses for any fiscal year that must be paid prior to the receipt of tax payments and other revenues for
such fiscal year.
Community Development Block Grant Fund
Accounts for Federal grant monies received from the Housing and Urban Development Department
under Title II of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 and Rental Rehabilitation
Program funds.
Community Facilities Revenue Fund
Accounts for the rental revenues received from the Hayes Mansion and the Ice Centre operations and
provides for the accumulation and transfer of base rental income to the appropriate debt service funds
for repayment of the facilities- related debts.
Construction and Property Conveyance Tax Funds
The Construction Tax is a flat rate assessed to residential, commercial and industrial development. The
Property Conveyance Tax is a fee imposed at a rate of $ 3.30 for each $ 1,000 of the value of property
conveyed. Construction and Property Conveyance Tax Funds are dedicated to the Park and Community
Facilities Development, Communications, Fire, Library and Service Yards capital programs.
Convention and Cultural Al& its Fund
Established to manage and operate the San Jose McEnery Convention Center, Center for the Performing
Arts ( CPA), Civic Audit orium, Montgomery Theatre, Exhibit Hall, and their related facilities and
grounds. The fund also contains the operating budget and several grant programs for the Office of
Cultural Affairs.
I- 9
CITY OF SAN Josfi
BUDGET GUIDE
Fund Descriptions
Special Revenue Funds ( Co& d.)
Economic Development Enhancement Fund
Accounts for Federal funds received from the Economic Development Administration program for
eligible administrative expenses and loans to small businesses.
Economic Development Administration Loan Fund
Accounts for Federal funds received from the Economic Development Administration Loan program
for eligible administrative expenses and loans to small businesses.
Emergency Reserve Fund
Accounts for reserves established from local revenues to meet public emergencies.
Federal Drug Forfeiture Fund
Accounts for Federal drug forfeiture monies received pursuant to the drug abuse prevention and control
provisions of Title 21, Chapter 13 of the United States Codes. City Council guidelines for this fund
stipulate that seizure monies be used for the financing of programs or costs required for the direct or
indirect enhancement of narcotics- related enforcement activities.
Gas Tax Maintenance and Construction Funds
Represent the City’s portion of the State collected Gas Tax. Revenues are restricted for acquisition,
construction, improvement, and maintenance of public streets subject to provisions of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California and to provide for Traffic capital improvements.
Tobacco Settlement Fund (“ Healthy Neighborhood Venture Fund”)
Accounts for the distribution of the funds received by the City of San Jose related to the national tobacco
settlement. The funds are allocated as follows: 25% for Anti- Tobacco/ Health programs, 50% for
Education/ Health programs, and 25% for Seniors/ Health programs.
Home Investment Partnership Prog- ram Fund
Accounts for all monies allocated to the City by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development for affordable housing projects pursuant to the HOME Investment Partnership Act.
Housing and Homeless Fund
Established in February 1993 to assist non- profit service providers and organizations by providing one-time
grants for housing- related projects.
Integrated Waste Management Fund
Accounts for activities related to the Integrated Waste Management Program which includes garbage
collection, recycling services and related billing operations. The fund collects revenues from the City’s
Recycle Plus program. These funds are expended for programs related to the City’s efforts to comply
with State law requiring cities to reduce waste sent to landfills by the year 2000, along with other
integrated waste management services.
I- 10
CITY OF SANJOS~~;
BUDGET GUIDE
Fund Descriptions ( Cont’d.)
Special Revenue Funds ( Cont’d.)
Lake Cunningham Park Fund
Accounts for the parking fees and lease payment revenues used for the purchase of equipment,
maintenance and operations at Lake Cunningham Park.
Library Benefit Assessment District Fund
Accounts for the annual assessment revenues to be used for enhancing the City’s library services and
facilities.
Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Fund ( Memo Fund to the General Fund)
Accounts for the funding received from the federal government in support of the Local Law
Enforcement Block Grant Program. These grant funds are used to support law enforcement activities
such as training, overtime for law enforcement officers, procurement of equipment, technology and other
material directly related to law enforcement functions.
Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund
Accounts for San Jose Redevelopment Agency tax increment funds received to provide affordable
housing rehabilitation and new housing programs. Funds are available for eligible administrative
expenses, loans and grants.
Municipal Golf Course Fund
Accounts for the construction, management and operation of various golf courses and is hnanced
through user charges.
Residential Construction Tax Contributions Fund
Accounts for taxes imposed upon the constructor of single- family dwelling units or any mobile home lots
in the City. The tax is collected and placed in the Residential Construction Tax Fund and is used to
reimburse developers who have constructed that portion of an arterial street that is wider than what is
normally required in connection with residential development. The funds are also used to construct
median island landscaping and other+ street improvements.
State Drug Forfeiture Fund
Established to account for State drug forfeiture monies received whenever the Police Department is
involved in asset seizures from convicted drug law violators. City Council guidelines for this fund
stipulate that seizure monies be used for the hnancing of programs or costs required for the direct or
indirect enhancement of narcotics- related enforcement activities.
Stores Fund
Accounts for the purchase and issuance of materials and supplies consumed by the departments for their
general operations.
I- 11
CITY OF SAN Josti
BUDGET GUIDE
Fund Descriptions ( Cont’d.)
Special Revenue Funds ( Confd.)
Storm Drainage Fee Fund
Accounts for fees collected from developers as a result of connections to the storm drainage sewer
system which may be used for construction, reconstruction and maintenance of the storm drainage
system and for land acquisition for such system.
Storm Sewer Operating Fund
Accounts for revenues collected from owners of properties that benefit from the storm drainage system.
Funds may be used for the maintenance and operation of the storm drainage system. Expenditures are
focused on non- point source pollution reduction, along with maintenance and operation of the storm
drainage system.
Subdivision Park Trust Fund
Accounts for payments of fees in lieu of dedication of land for park and recreation purposes in residential
subdivisions. Monies in the fund, including accrued interest, may be expended solely for the acquisition
or development of improvements on parkland to serve the subdivision for which the fees were paid.
Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund
Accounts for revenues received from the State of California ( AB 3229) to be used for front- line
municipal police services.
Transient Occupancy Tax Fund
Assessed as a percentage of the rental price for transient occupancy lodging charged when the period of
occupancy is less than 30 days. The tax rate is currently lo%, 6% of which is placed in this fund and 4O/ o
of which is deposited in the General Fund. The uses of revenues from this source are specified by City
Ordinance and include grants and rental subsidies for Fine Arts and cultural programs, and subsidies for
the San Jose Convention and Visitors Bureau and the Conventions, Arts, and Entertainment
Department.
Underground Utility Fund
Accounts for revenues received as assessments and fees for the City’s costs and expenses to place certain
utility facilities underground. The Underground Utility Program implements the City’s General Plan
goals and policies, which state that the City should encourage the movement of existing overhead utilities
underground. The fund is used to establish Rule 20B Underground Utility Districts.
Vehicle Maintenance and Operations Fund
Accounts for the operation, maintenance and replacement of City vehicles and equipment. The fund also
supports the Alternative Fuel Grant Program.
Workforce Investment Act Fund ( Memo Fund to the General Fund)
Accounts for the administration of a federal program that provides primary employment and training
services to dislocated and low- income residents.
I- 12
CITY OF SAN Jo&
BUDGET GUIDE
Fund Descriptions ( ContW!
Capital Project Funds
Branch Libraries Bond Projects Fund
Accounts for General Obligation bond proceeds approved by voters on the November 2000 ballot
( Measure 0). The use of this fund is dedicated to acquisition of property, and expansion and
construction of branch libraries.
Construction Excise Tax Fund
Tax on the construction of residential, commercial and mobile home developments ( also referred to as
the Commercial, Residential, Mobile Home Park Building Tax). This tax is based on building valuation,
with the majority of the revenues in the fund historically being used for traffic improvements.
Central Service Yard Acquisition and Development Fund
Accounts for bond proceeds for the acquisition and development of a new central service yard.
Civic Center Construction Fund
Accounts for the revenues and construction costs related to the construction of a new Civic Center.
Civic Center Parking Fund
Accounts for bond proceeds for construction of Civic Center parking garages.
Fiber Optics Development Fund
Accounts for the installation of a fiber optic conduit system that the City will own and lease to
telecommunication companies and other users.
Parks and Recreation Bond Projects Fund
Accounts for General Obligation bond proceeds approved by voters on the November 2000 ballot
( Measure P). The use of this fund is dedicated to acquisition of property, and upgrades and construction
of Neighborhood Parks, Community Centers, Trails, Regional Parks and Sports complexes.
Redevelopment Agency Capital Project Funds
Funds paid directly by the Redevelopment Agency for construction and acquisition of public
improvements on behalf of the Agency and are contained in a number of Redevelopment Capital Project
funds. . To the extent project expenditures do not occur, revenues are not transferred.
Storm Sewer Capital Fund
Accounts for revenues collected from owners of properties that benefit from the storm drainage system.
Funds may be used for the construction and reconstruction of the storm drainage system.
I- 13
CITY OF SAN Jose
BUDGET GUIDE
Fund Descriptions ( Cont’d.)
Enterprise Funds
San Josh International Airport Capital Funds
Finance the Airport’s capital expenditures and consist of the following Airport Capital Improvement
Fund; Airport Revenue Bond Improvement Fund; Airport Renewal and Replacement Fund; and the
Airport Passenger Facility Charge Fund.
Airport Operating Funds
Finance the operation of the Airport and consist of the following Airport Revenue Fund; Airport
Maintenance and Operation Fund; Airport Surplus Revenue Fund; Customer Facilities and
Transportation Fee Fund, and the Airport Fiscal Agent Fund.
General Purpose Parking Fund
Accounts for operation of City parking lot facilities, parking lots and parking meters located within the
City. Financing and capital construction of certain parking facilities are also accounted for within this
fund. The Parking System provides parking to the general public and is financed through parking fees.
Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee Fund
Accounts for connection fees charged to new development to access the City’s sanitary sewer system and
the regional San Jose/ Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant ( WPCP). Funds are restricted to the
construction and reconstruction of the system.
Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer System Capital Funds
Accounts for the construction of improvements to the regional San Jose/ Santa Clara Water Pollution
Control Plant ( WPCP) and the purchase of equipment. The Sewer Service and Use Charge Capital
Improvement Fund receives a transfer from the Sewer Service and Use Charge Operating Fund for the
reconstruction of the sanitary sewer system.
Wastewater Treatment Plant and Sewer System Operating Funds
Account for the ongoing operations of the sewer system and the regional San Jo&/ Santa Clara Water
Pollution Control Plant ( WPCP).
Municipal Water System
Funds were established to account for the five water system operating districts: North San Jose,
Evergreen, Coyote, Edenvale, and Alviso. The water system provides services to the general public on a
continuing basis and is financed through user charges.
I- 14
CITY OF SAN Josh
BUDGET GUIDE
Fund Descriptions ( Cont’d.)
Trust and Agency Funds
Developers’ Fees
Accounts for developer deposits related to certain development projects as mandated by the State of
California Assembly Bill # 518
Emma Prusch Memorial Park Fund
Established for the development and improvement of Emma Drusch Memorial Park.
Federated Retirement Fund
Established to account for the accumulation of resources to be used for retirement annuity payments to
all full- time and some eligible part- time City of San Jose employees, except members of the Police and
Fire Retirement System.
Gift Trust Fund
Established to receive gifts, donations and bequests.
Municipal Health Services Program Fund
Established to account for money received from the Medicare Waiver Demonstration Project funded by
the Health Care Financing Administration ( HCFA) of the U. S. Department of Health and Human
Services and disbursements made by the City to various health care clinics on behalf of HCFA. Funding
is used to provide community- based health care services to Medicare recipients at four San Jose clinics.
Police and Fire Retirement Funds
Account for the accumulation of resources to be used for retirement annuity payments to alI sworn
officers of the City of San Jose’s Police and Fire Departments.
I- 15
2001- 2002
Summary
Information
City of San Jose
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
TOTAL CITY SOURCE AND USE 02 FLTDS
1999- 2000 2000- 2001 2001- 2002
Actuai Adopted Adopted
( 1’ 8 8
GENERAL FUND
Fund Balance
Liquidation of Encumbrances
Encumbrances
Carryover
General Revenue
Property Tax
Sales Tax
Transient Occupancy Tax
Franchise Fees
U& y Tax
Licenses and Permits
Fines and Forfeitures
Revenue from Money and Property
Revenue from Local Agencies
Revenue from State Government
Revenue from Federal Government
Departmental Charges
Other Revenue
456,868
24,062,873 24, X6,802 32,551,317
136,796,747 121,277,582 150,203,097
Beginning Fund Balance S 161,316,488 $ 146,034,384 $ 182,754,414
71,970,853 74,700,000 82,167, OOO
140,306,536 139,300,000 153,650, OOO
8,287,524 8J68, OOO 10,000,000
30,322259 29,313, ooo 31,567, OOO
53,425,760 54,034, ooo 62,520, OOO
65,364,099 61,731,902 66,557,020
10,308,366 9,500,358 10,311,100
17,202,339 14,443, ooo 15,261,500
34,030,502 36,750,447 41,269,522
52,551,515 52,639,673 56,523,615
3,048,666 2,264,168 2,380,658
21,838,512 19,071,854 21,919,258
18,145,850 9,908,558 13,300,084
Subtotal General Revenue 526,802,781 511,924,960 567,426,757
Transfers and Reimbursements
Overhead Reimbursements
Transfers
Reimbursements for Services
24,554,180 24,003,156 28,293,561
19,371,517 18,199,361 21,181,417
18,461,272 16,757,655 17,451,111
Subtotal Transfers and Reimbursements 62,386,969 58,960,172 66,926,089
Total General Fund $ 750,506,238 $ 716,919,516 $ 817,107,260
Less Transfers, Loans, and Contributions ( 88,625,499) ( 103,687,570) ( 128,710,431)
NET GENERAL FUND TOTAL $ 661,880,739 $ 613,2X, 946 $ 688,396,829
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Airport Customer Facility and Transportation Fee Fund
Airport Fiscal Agent Fund
Airport Maintenance and Operation Fund
Airport Revenue Fund
Airport Surplus Revenue Fund
General Purpose Parking Fund
Sewage Treatment Plant Connection Fee Fund
Sewer Service and Use Charge Fund
Treatment Plant Income Fund
Treatment Plant Operating Fund
Water Utility Fund
Total Enterprke Funds
Less Transfers, Loans, and Contributions
796,931 5,340,377 7,803,743
14,237,043 14,814,912 14,717,818
67,171,974 74,498,472 84,347,962
112,051,793 126,515,510 159,575,552
34,151,576 55,361,478 105,686,103
18,276,338 68,181,587 23,956,883
41,279,892 41,325,958 38,684,012
113,694,809 106,098,642 95,942,091
18,225,069 11,091,323 4,592,289
75,470,391 73,611,509 77,782,006
25,401,901 23,954,418 23,530,636
f 520,757,717 $ 600,794,186 8 636,619,095
( 208,161,607) ( 293,589,948) ( 3X2,375,552)
NET ENTERPRISE FUNDS TOTAL f 3X2,596,110 $ 30734,238 $ 32433,543
II- 1
City of San Jo&
2001- 2002 Adopted Budget
TOTAL CITY SOURCE AND USE OF FUNDS
1999- 2000
Actual
2000- 2001 2001- 2002
Adopted Adopted
TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS
Gift Trust Fund
Municipal Health Services Program Fund
Total Trust and Agency Funds
Less Transfers, Loans, and Con