HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2010 0120 CC REG ITEM 10LITEM
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT or- r�ooF�hh 4,
city councii meeting
LAO _4Z
TO: The Honorable City Councilcr:Alaa
FROM: Ron Ahlers, Finance Director __ ...__ - .--- ---- --
DATE: January 13, 2010 (CC Meeting of January 20, 2010)
SUBJECT: Consider Annual Financial Statements and Other Audit Reports for
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009
SUMMARY
The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report {CAFR }, Management Letter, Report on
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based
on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government
Auditing Standards, Independent Accountant's Report on Agreed -Upon Procedures
Applied to Appropriations Limit Worksheets and the Independent Auditor's memo
regarding the audit process of the City of Moorpark for June 30, 2009 are hereby
submitted for Council approval.
BACKGROUND
The City is required to conduct an annual independent audit of its financial statements.
The audit firm of Teaman, Ramirez & Smith, Inc. Certified Public Accountants {TRS}
conducted the annual audit and with staff assistance prepared the required financial
statements. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, the City received an unqualified
opinion. The City complied with GASB Statement No. 45, Other Post Employment
Benefits {OPEB} during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009.
DISCUSSION
CAFR
Attached for your approval are the annual financial statements for the year ended June
30, 2009 for the City of Moorpark. The financial statements are comprehensive and
include all of the fund types in the City.
The City Council engaged an independent certified public accounting firm, TRS, to
perform the annual audit of the City of Moorpark and its component units. The results of
the audit performed are formally published in the CAFR. This report must satisfy both
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and applicable legal requirements.
Additionally, the CAFR is sent out to numerous government agencies and financial
institutions in order to comply with various reporting, financial and subsequent bond
disclosure requirements. The overall financial picture of the City is presented, in
accordance to the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB)
pronouncements, on a Government -wide basis. This is designed to provide readers
93
Honorable City Council
January 20, 2010
Page 2
with a broad overview of the City's finances similar to a private- sector business. These
statements show the June 30, 2009 fiscal year balances and overall results of
operations for the period then ended, for all City funds, including the Redevelopment
Agency. The statements are as follows:
Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD & A). This discussion and analysis starts
the financial section of the CAFR and serves as an executive summary. GAAP requires
that management provide this narrative introduction, overview and analysis to
accompany the basic financial statements. The letter of transmittal, which precedes the
MD & A in the introductory section, is designed to compliment the MD & A and should
be read in conjunction with it. The MD & A is found immediately following the report
from the independent auditors. The report from the auditors contains an opinion letter in
which an entity can receive basically 3 opinions; unqualified, qualified, and adverse. An
unqualified opinion from the auditors is the highest given. For the fiscal year 2008/09
audit, the City of Moorpark received an unqualified opinion.
The Statement of Net Assets presents information on all of the City's assets and
liabilities, with the difference between the two reported as net assets. Over time,
increases or decreases in net assets {page 15} may serve as a useful indicator of
whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating.
The Statement of Activities presents information showing how the City's net assets
changed during the most recent fiscal year. All changes in net assets are reported as
soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing
of related cashflows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for
some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., earned but
unused vacation and sick leave). A positive increase in net assets of $4.3 million was
reported in fiscal year 2008/09 {page 16 }.
The government -wide financial statements distinguish functions of the City that are
principally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues (governmental
activities). The governmental activities of the City include general government, public
safety, public services, parks and recreation and interest on long -term debt.
Following the government -wide statements in the CAFR, the Balance Sheet, and the
Statement of Revenues. Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances are presented
for all major and non -major governmental funds. A major fund is one of material
significance and is determined through prescribed calculations. The General Fund is
always considered a major fund by definition. Other governmental funds can be
declared major funds by management due to other factors, even if they fail the
qualifications resulting from the calculations. Non -major funds are all combined together
for presentation. Reconciliations between these governmental statements and the
government -wide statements are also presented.
The Statement of Fiduciary Assets and Liabilities, Agency Funds is located on page 25.
.,
Honorable City Council
January 20, 2010
Page 3
All of these statements are followed by the Notes to the Financial Statements.
The Required Supplementary Information begins at page 66 and details the budget to
actual comparisons for all the major funds of the City, beginning with the General Fund.
The next section of the CAFR provides statements for each individual non -major
governmental fund. The governmental funds are presented in their various categories:
special revenue funds and capital project funds. Additionally, there is the budget to
actual comparisons for each non -major fund.
The last section of the CAFR, which is unaudited, contains statistical data about the
City of Moorpark. All of the tables and schedules present numerous facts about the
City, many for the last 10 years. The statistical facts include population figures, principal
taxpayers, and assessed valuations of taxable property to name a few.
The CAFR can be found on the City's website: http: / /ci.moorpark.ca.us
General Fund Financial Anal
For fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, the General Fund unreserved fund balance
totaled $3.2 million which equates to approximately 22% of operating expenses. Total
General Fund expenditures and transfers out to other funds exceeded total revenues
and transfers in from other funds by $0.6 million. The City transferred out $2.0 million to
the Special Projects Fund this past year. Without this transfer the General Fund would
have had a positive change in fund balance of approximately $1.4 million.
Management Letter and Single Audit Report
As part of the annual audit, the independent auditors are also required to report to
management regarding internal controls and the City's compliance with federal grants.
The independent auditors issue two reports to satisfy this requirement: Management
Letter and Single Audit Report.
Management Letter
It is standard practice for the independent auditors to note recommendations for
improvement in the Management Letter.
There are various levels of observations that are reported to management. The first and
most serious type of observation is known as a "material weakness ". A material
weakness is a significant deficiency, or a combination of significant deficiencies, that
results in more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial
statements will not be prevented or detected. The independent auditors reported no
"material weakness" for the City.
95
Honorable City Council
January 20, 2010
Page 4
The second level of deficiency is a "significant deficiency ". A significant deficiency is a
control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies, that adversely affect the
entity's ability to authorize, initiate, record, process or report financial data reliably in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than
a remote likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more
than inconsequential will not be prevented or detected. The independent auditors
reported no "significant deficiency" for the City.
The third and final category of observations identified by the independent auditors is
that of "control deficiency ". A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of
a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing
their assigned functions, to prevent or detect financial statement misstatements on a
timely basis. A deficiency in design exists when a control necessary to meet the control
objective is missing, or when an existing control is not properly designed so that even if
the control operates as designed, the control objective is not always met. A deficiency
in operation exists when a properly designed control does not operate as designed or
when the person performing the control does not possess the necessary authority or
qualifications to perform the control effectively. These comments are intended to
improve internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies. The independent
auditors reported four such observations: (1) Recreation Revenues; (2) Purchasing
Policy; (3) New Accounting Standard; (4) Fraud Prevention and Detection Program.
During the course of the coming months the City will be implementing the changes
necessary to address these observations.
Single Audit Report — {No report required this year}
The City was not required to conduct a single audit this year because the City did not
meet the $500,000 federal grant expenditure threshold. The Single Audit is specifically
designed to meet the needs of all federal grantor agencies from which the City receives
funds.
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other
Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with
Government Auditing Standards
The independent auditors noted no findings in this report for the fiscal year ended June
30, 2009.
Independent Accountant's Report on Agreed -Upon Procedures Applied to
Appropriations Limit Worksheets
The independent auditors noted no findings for the City's calculations with regards to
the appropriations limit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009.
Independent Auditor's memo regarding the audit process
The independent auditors noted no findings for the audit process for the fiscal year
ended June 30, 2009.
Honorable City Council
January 20, 2010
Page 5
STAFF RECOMMENDATION (Roll Call Vote)
Accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), Management Letter,
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other
Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with
Government Auditing Standards, Independent Accountant's Report on Agreed -Upon
Procedures Applied to Appropriations Limit Worksheets, and the Independent Auditor's
memo regarding the audit process and receive and file this report.
Attachments:
1. City of Moorpark CAFR for year ended June 30, 2009
2. Management Letter
3. Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in
Accordance with Government Auditing Standards
4. Independent Accountant's Report on Agreed -Upon Procedures Applied to
Appropriations Limit Worksheets
5. Independent Auditor's memo regarding the audit process
97
Attachment 1
m
A
1100 M W. 4 �
n
1� C, 0 @ oll til Q K QN 0 61n, VMKIZ
ei,
fl
11V
I --N
4, 7
AN
Mimi
fl
11V
I --N
4, 7
AN
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Prepared By:
Ron Alders, Finance Director
Irmina Lumbad, Finance & Accounting Manager
Debbie Burdorf, Accountant I
1 1,
City of Moorpark
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Year Ended June 30, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTORY SECTION
Letter of Transmittal i - v
Directory of Officials vi
Organizational Chart vii
H. FINANCIAL SECTION.
Independent Auditors' Report 1 - 2
Management Discussion & Analysis 3-13
Basic Financial Statements:
Government -wide Financial Statements
Statement of Net Assets
14
Statement of Activities
15
Fund Financial Statements
q Balance Sheet - Governmental Funds
16 -18
Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the
Statement of Net Assets
19
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances -
20-22
Governmental Funds
Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes
in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities
23
Statement of Fiduciary Assets and Liabilities
24
Notes to Financial Statements
25-64
Required Supplementary Information:
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -
Budget and Actual - General Fund
65-67
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -
Budget and Actual - Street and Traffic Safety Development
Special Revenue Fund
68
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -
Budget and Actual - Community Development Special Revenue Fund
69-70
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -
Budget and Actual — Assessment District Special Revenue Fund
71
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -
Budget and Actual - Endowment Special Revenue Fund
72
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -
Budget and Actual - Park/Public Facilities Special Revenue Fund
73
101
City of Moorpark
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Year Ended June 30, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
PAGE
Required Supplementary Information - Continued:
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -
Budget and Actual — MRA Area 1 Operations Special Revenue Fund 74
Schedule of Funding Progress for MRHP 75
Supplementary Information:
Budgetary Comparison Schedules - Major Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances -
Budget and Actual:
Police Facilities Fee Capital Projects Fund
76
Redevelopment Agency Capital Projects Fund
77
Redevelopment Agency Debt Service Fund
78
Non -Major Governmental Funds
79-80
Combining Balance Sheet
81-84
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
85-88
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances -
Budget and Actual:
Library Services Special Revenue Fund
89
Traffic Safety Special Revenue Fund
90
Affordable Housing Special Revenue Fund
91
Los Angeles Area of Contribution Special Revenue Fund
92
Tierra Rejada/Spring A.O.0 Special Revenue Fund
93
Cassey /Gabbert Area of Contribution Special Revenue Fund
94
Freemont Storm Drain A.O.0 Special Revenue Fund
95
State and Federal Assistance Special Revenue Fund
96
State Gas Tax Special Revenue Fund
97
Prop 1B Local Streets and Roads Special Revenue Fund
98
Prop 1B Safety and Security Special Revenue Fund
99
Low and Moderate Income Housing Special Revenue Fund
100
Local Transportation Transit Special Revenue Fund
101
Solid Waste Special Revenue Fund
102
Capital Projects Fund
103
City Hall Building Capital Projects Fund
104
Equipment Replacement Capital Projects Fund
105
Statement of Changes in Net Assets - Agency Funds
106
M. STATISTICAL SECTION
Net Assets by Component - Last Seven Fiscal Years 107
Changes in Net Assets Governmental Activities - Last Seven Fiscal Years 108
Fund Balances of Governmental Funds - Last Seven Fiscal Years 109
Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds - Last Seven Fiscal Years 110
102
City of Moorpark
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Year Ended June 30, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
PAGE
M. STATISTICAL SECTION - Continued
Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property -
Last Ten Fiscal Years
111
Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates - Last Ten Fiscal Years
112
Principal Property Tax Payers- Current Year and Nine Years Ago
113
Property Tax Levies and Collections- Last Ten Fiscal Years
114
Ratio's of Outstanding Debt by Type - Last Ten Fiscal Years
115
Ratio of General Bonded Debt Outstanding - Last Ten Fiscal Years
116
Direct and Overlapping Debt
117
Legal Debt Margin Information - Last Ten Fiscal Years
118-119
Pledged Revenue Coverage - Last Nine Fiscal Years
120
Demographic and Economic Statistics - Last Ten Calendar Years
121
Principal Employers- Current and Ten Calendar Years Ago
122
Full-Time and Part-Time City Employees by Function - Last Ten Fiscal Years
123
Operating Indicators by Function - Last Ten Fiscal Years
124
Capital Asset Statistics by Function- Last Ten Fiscal Years
125
103
INTRODUCTORY SECTION
1 t A
City of!,Uoorpar!
799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 517 -6200 fax (805) 532 -2545
December 4, 2009
Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council and Citizens of Moorpark:
We are pleased to present this Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of
the City of Moorpark, California for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009. The City
has continued to prepare the CAFR to comply with the financial reporting model
developed by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement 34.
This model improves the financial reporting by adding significant additional
information not previously available in local government financial statements prior to
GASB 34.
As a result of GASB 34, the Government -Wide Financial Statements are presented
along with the fund -by -fund financial information. The Government -Wide Financial
Statements include a Statement of Net Assets that provides the total net equity of
the City including infrastructures and the Statement of Activities that shows the cost
of providing government services. These statements include all assets and liabilities
using the accrual basis of accounting (similar to a private- sector business) versus
the modified accrual method used in the fund financial statements. A reconciliation
of the balance sheet of the Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Assets has
been prepared to reflect the changes between the two reporting methods. In
addition, the reporting model includes an emphasis on the City's major funds as
shown in the Governmental Fund Statements. These statements and other
significant information are analyzed in the narrative section called Management's
Discussion and Analysis (MD&A). The MD&A provides "financial highlights" and a
brief overview of the basic financial statements. In addition, the MD&A provides the
readers of the City's financial statements with financial trends, explanation for
variances and economic factors for the upcoming fiscal year's budget.
Furthermore, in May 2004, the GASB issued Statement No. 44, Economic Condition
Reporting. This statement requires the statistical section to be presented with
detailed information, typically in ten -year trends, that assists users in utilizing the
basic financial statements, notes to basic financial statements, and required
supplementary information to assess the economic condition of a government. This
statement was effective starting with fiscal year 2005/06 and has resulted in
changes to the statistical section. The City continues to present the statistical
JANICE S. PARVIN MARK VAN DAM ROSEANN MIKOS KEITH F. MILLHOUSE DAVID POLLOCK
Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember
105
section with detail information to be in compliance with GASB No. 44 requirements
for fiscal year 2008/09.
Responsibility for both the accuracy of this data, and the completeness and fairness
of its presentation, including all disclosures, rests with the City. To the best of our
knowledge and belief, the enclosed data are accurate in all material respects and
are reported in a manner that presents fairly the account groups and the financial
position and operational results of the City's various funds and component units. All
disclosures necessary to enable the reader to gain an understanding of the City's
activities have been included.
THE REPORTING ENTITY AND ITS SERVICES
The financial reporting entity includes all the funds of the City of Moorpark as well as
all of its component units. The City of Moorpark is the primary government. The
component units are the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency (the RDA), the Moorpark
Public Financing Authority and the Moorpark Industrial Development Authority.
The City was incorporated in 1983 as a general law city and operates under a
Council - Manager form of government.
The RDA was formed in 1987 with the objective of providing long -term financing of
capital improvements designed to eliminate physical and economic blight in the
designated project area.
The Moorpark Public Financing Authority was formed in 1993 as a joint powers
authority between the City and the RDA in order to provide financial assistance to
the City and the RDA by issuing debt and financing the construction of public
facilities.
The Industrial Development Authority of the City of Moorpark was formed in 1985
pursuant to the California Industrial Development Financing Act (the "Act "). Its
purpose is to finance the acquisition and development of certain industrial activities
as permitted by the Act and to issue bonds for the purpose of enabling industrial
firms to finance the cost of such activities.
PROFILE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK
The City provides a full range of services to its residents with a total regular full -time
staff of about 61 and part-time staff of approximately 45 employees. Major services
such as police (contracted with Ventura County Sheriff), attorney, library,
development engineering and inspection, building and safety plan check/inspection,
transit, street sweeping and landscape maintenance are provided through
contractual arrangements. In addition, fire protection is provided by the Ventura
County Fire District. The City provides services such as emergency management,
redevelopment, housing, planning, code compliance, recreation programs,
ii
106
vector /animal control, park and facilities maintenance, street maintenance, city
engineering, crossing guard and administrative management services with city
employees.
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK
In 1887, Robert W. Poindexter was granted title to the present site of Moorpark. He
named the City after the Moorpark apricot which grew throughout the valley.
Poindexter plotted Moorpark city streets and planted Pepper trees in the downtown
area. The City of Moorpark was incorporated in 1983 as the tenth city of Ventura
County with a Council- Manager form of government. The Mayor is elected at large
to serve a two -year term. The four Council Members are elected at large to serve
staggered four -year terms. The size of the City was 12.36 square miles with a
population of about 10,000 at incorporation and is currently at 12.44 square miles
with a population of about 36,150 (source: California Department of Finance).
Moorpark is recognized for having the lowest number of serious crimes committed in
Ventura County and is one of the safest cities of its size in the United States.
BUDGETARY CONTROL
The City of Moorpark prepares an annual budget consistent with Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (GAAP) for all governmental funds on a modified accrual basis
where revenues are recognized when they become measurable and available to
finance expenditures of the current period. Expenditures are recorded when the
goods or services are received and the liabilities are incurred.
Department Directors are responsible, not only to accomplish his /her particular goals
within each program, but also to monitor budget allocations consistent to the funding
levels adopted by the City Council prior to July 1 of the budget year.
In addition, the City maintains budgetary control through the use of an encumbrance
accounting system. As purchase orders are issued, corresponding amounts are
encumbered for later payments to ensure that budget amounts are not over spent.
INTERNAL CONTROLS
The City's management is responsible for developing and establishing an internal
control structure to ensure that the assets of the government are protected from
loss, theft, misuse and to ensure that adequate accounting data is compiled to allow
for the preparation of financial statements in conformity with Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles. The internal control structure is designed to provide
reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that these objectives are met. The concept
of reasonable assurance recognizes that: 1) the cost of a control should not exceed
the benefits likely to be derived; and 2) the valuation of the costs and benefits
requires estimates and judgments by management.
iii
107
ANNUAL AUDIT
An independent accounting firm has performed the annual audit of the City's
financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009. As part of the annual
audit, reviews are made to determine the adequacy of the City's internal control
structure, as well as to determine that the City has complied with certain provisions
of laws and regulations. Their examination has been completed and the auditor's
report on the City's financial statements is included at the beginning of the Financial
Section of this report.
APPROPRIATION LIMIT
Article XIIIB of Proposition 4, commonly referred to as the "Gann Initiative" was
approved by California voters in 1979, which placed limits on the amount of
proceeds of taxes that State and Local agencies can appropriate and spend each
fiscal year. In addition, voters approved Proposition 111 in 1990 to further increase
the accountability of local government in adopting their limits by requiring the
governing body to annually adopt, by resolution, an appropriation limit for the
upcoming fiscal year. The appropriation limit and the City's appropriations subject to
the limit for the fiscal year 2008/09 amounted to $22,189,171 and $10,169,255,
respectively.
CASH MANAGEMENT
The City Treasurer is responsible for investing cash temporarily idle during the year
in accordance with the State Government Code and the Investment Policy adopted
by the City Council. The City diversified its investment portfolio by utilizing several
investment instruments. At fiscal year end June 30, 2009, approximately $59.7
million (City & RDA combined) was invested with the State Treasurer's Local Agency
Investment Fund (LAIF); approximately $42 million in the Ventura County Pool;
approximately $3.1 million in U.S. Treasury and Agency Securities; and $1.2 million
was invested in Certificate of Deposits (CDs).
The cash management system of the City of Moorpark is designed to monitor
revenues and expenditures to ensure the investment of monies to the fullest extent
possible. The criteria for selecting investments and the order of priority are (a)
safety, (b) liquidity, and (c) yield. The underlying objective of the City's policy is to
obtain the highest interest rate yields, and at the same time, ensure that money is
available when needed and all deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation or collateralized.
CAPITAL ASSETS
In accordance with GASB Statement No. 34, the City has reported all capital assets
including infrastructures in the Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets. The City
elected to use the basic approach for all infrastructures reporting, whereby
iv
11'
depreciation expense and accumulated depreciation have been recorded. Capital
assets for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, have a net ending balance of $130.6
million.
LONG -TERM LIABILITIES /BONDED LIABILITIES
At June 30, 2009, the City has no outstanding bonds or other debt but does have
long -term liabilities in the approximate amount of $0.6 million for employee
compensated absences (accrued leave) and $1.4 million for Pension related
liabilities.
The Agency has the 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds, the 2001 Tax Allocation Bonds and
the 2006 Tax Allocation Bonds outstanding in the amounts of $6.0 million, $11.5
million and $11.7 million, respectively. The purpose of the 1999 Bonds was to
advance refund the Agency's previously issued 1993 Tax Allocation Bonds. The
purpose of the 2001 and 2006 bonds were to finance a portion of the costs of
implementing the Redevelopment Plan and fund redevelopment activities within the
MRA project area.
RISK MANAGEMENT
The City is a member of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority ( CJPIA)
established under the provisions of California Government Code 6500 et seq.,
consisting of over 100 California public entities. The CJPIA provides risk coverage
for its members through the pooling of losses and purchased insurance. The
coverage extends to general liability and workers' compensation administered by the
Authority. In addition, the City also participates in the all -risk property protection
offered by the Authority. Various control techniques, including safety, ergonomic,
harassment and driver awareness training have been implemented to minimize
losses.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express appreciation to all City staff that assisted and contributed
to the preparation of this report, particularly to the members of the Finance
Department. We would also like to extend our appreciation to the auditors, Teaman,
Ramirez & Smith, Inc., Certified Public Accountants for their professional assistance.
As in the past, the CAFR will be available on the City's website at
www.ci.moorpark:ca.us.
Respectfully submitted,
STEVEN KUENY
CITY MANAGER
U
RON AHLERS
FINANCE DIRECTOR
109
City of Moorpark
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009
DIRECTORY OF CITY OFFICIALS
CITY COUNCIL
Janice S. Parvin, Mayor
Mark Van Dam, Mayor Pro Tern Roseann Mikos, Councilmember
Keith F. Millhouse, Councilmember David Pollock, Councilmember
CITY MANAGEMENT STAFF
Steven Kueny, City Manager
Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager
Barry Hogan, Deputy City Manager
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
David Bobardt, Planning Director
Yugal Lall, City Engineer /Public Works Director
Deborah Traffenstedt, Administrative Services Director
Vacant, Parks, Recreation & Community Services Director
V1
110
c
Arts Commission
Parks and Recreation
Commission
Planning Commission
Deputy City
Manager
Community
Development
Department`
.Building and Safety
.Business Registration
.CDBG
.Code Compliance
.Film Permits
.Planning
.Vendor Permits
Police Services
(Contract)
Administrative
Services /City Clerk
Department
.City Clerk
.Human Resources
.Information Systems
.Risk Management
City Manager
Parks,: Recreation and
Community Services
Department
.Active Adult Center
.Animal RegulationNector
Control
.Art in Public Places
.Library
.Parks /Landscape /Facilities/
Maintenance
.Recreation
.Solid Waste
City Attorney,
(Contract)
Assistant City Manager
.Emergency Services
.Grants
.Intergovernmental Community and
Legislative Relations
.Public Facility Capital Projects
.Public Information /Cable TV
.Redevelopment
Economic Development
Property Management
Housing
city
Engineer /Public
Norks Department
Assessment District Street
Lighting
.Capital Projects
.Crossing Guards
.Engineering
.NPDES
.Parking Enforcement
.Street Maintenance
Finance
Department
.Cash Management
.Central Services
.Finance and Accounting
.Fixed Assets Management
.Purchasing
FINANCIAL SECTION
112
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
Independent Auditors' Report
The Honorable City Council
The City of Moorpark, California
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund,
and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark, California (City), as of June 30,
2009, which collectively comprise the City of Moorpark's basic financial statements as listed in the table of
contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the City of Moorpark's management. Our
responsibility is to express opinions on these basic financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of
America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards,
issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform
the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the
financial position of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund
information of the City of Moorpark, California, as of June 30, 2009, and the respective changes in
financial position thereof for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America.
In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated December 4,
2009 on our consideration of the City of Moorpark's internal control over financial reporting and on our
tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and
other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over
financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the
internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit
performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the
results of our audit.
The management's discussion and analysis on pages 3 through 13, the budgetary comparison information
on pages 66 through 75, and the schedule of funding progress for MRHP are not a required part of the basic
financial statements, but are supplementary information required by accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. We have applied certain limited procedures, which consisted
principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation of the
required supplementary information. However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on
it.
Richard A. Teaman, cPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA • Javier H. Carrillo, cPA
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAX • www.trscpas.com 113
MB
ER' s
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively
comprise the City's basic financial statements. The introductory section, supplementary information
section, and statistical section, as listed in the table of contents are presented for purposes of additional
analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. The supplementary information
section has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements
and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken
as a whole. The introductory section and the statistical section have not been subjected to the auditing
procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on
them.
December 4, 2009
114
._J
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
As management of the City of Moorpark, California (the "City "), we offer readers of the City's financial statements
this narrative overview and analysis of the financial activities of the City (the "Primary Government ") for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2009. It is encouraged that the readers consider the information presented here in conjunction
with the accompanying basic financial statements.
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
• The assets of the City exceeded its liabilities at the close of the 2008/09 fiscal year by $239,673,695 (net
assets). Of this amount, $14,213,503 is not restricted by external law or administrative action for a specified
purpose. The City Council's approval is required before these funds may be used to meet the City's ongoing
obligations to citizens and creditors.
• The City's total net assets increased by $4,348,046 during the current fiscal year. The Statement of Net Assets
is presented on page 15.
• As of June 30, 2009, the City's governmental funds (General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service
Funds, and Capital Projects Funds) reported combined ending fund balances of $135,208,035, an increase of
$2,261,427, from the prior year.
• At the end of the current fiscal year, unreserved fund balance for the General Fund was $2,832,620.
• The City's total Long — Term Liabilities decreased by $1,018,568 or 3.3% during the current fiscal year. The
decrease is attributable to the difference between employee compensated absences addition; the fiscal years
regularly scheduled debt service payments for the 1999, 2001 and 2006 Tax Allocation Bonds; and the
decrease in pension related debt.
OVERVIEW OF THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
This discussion and analysis is intended to serve as an introduction to the City's basic financial statements. The City's
basic financial statements comprise three components:
1) Government -wide financial statements
2) Fund financial statements
3) Notes to basic financial statements
Other required supplementary information is included in addition to the basic financial statements.
Government -Wide Financial Statements. The City has presented its financial statements under the reporting model
required by Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 34 (GASB 34) and its related Statements,
GASB 37, 38, and 41. These financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview. of the City's
finances, in a manner similar to a private - sector business.
The government -wide financial statements include the statement of net assets and the statement of activities.
The governmental activities of the City include general government, public safety, public services, parks and
recreation, debt service, and interest on debt. The City does not have any business -type activities.
115
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
NNE 30, 2009
The statement of net assets presents information on all of the City's assets and liabilities, with the difference between
the two reported as net assets. Over time, increases and decreases in net assets may serve as a useful indicator of
whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating.
The statement of activities presents information showing how the City's net assets changed during the most recent
fiscal year. All changes in net assets are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs,
regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some
items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (i.e., uncollected taxes and earned but unused vacation
leave).
The government -wide financial statements include not only the City of Moorpark as the primary government, but also
a legally separate Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, the Moorpark Public Financing Authority, and the Industrial
Development Authority of the City of Moorpark. Although legally separate from the City, these component units are
blended with the primary government because of their governance or financial relationships to the City.
The government -wide financial statements can be found on pages 15 and 16 of this report.
Fund Financial Statements. A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources
that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City, like other state and local governments, uses
fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance - related legal requirements. All of the funds of the
City can be divided into two categories: governmental funds and fiduciary funds.
Governmental Funds. Governmental Funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as
governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. However, unlike the government -wide financial
statements, governmental fund financial statements focus on near -term inflows and outflows ofspendable resources, as
well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in
evaluating the City's near -term financial requirements.
Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements, it is useful
to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented for governmental
activities in the government -wide financial statements. By doing so, readers may better understand the long -term
impact of the City's near -term financing decisions. Both the governmental fund balance sheet and the governmental
fund statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances, provide a reconciliation to facilitate this
comparison between governmental funds and governmental activities.
The City maintains a variety of individual governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the
governmental fund balance sheet and in the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in
fund balances for the General Fund, Street and Traffic Safety, Community Development, Areas of Contribution,
Endowment, Park/Public Facilities, Police Facilities Fee, Moorpark Highlands Improvements, Moorpark
Redevelopment Agency (MRA) — Capital Projects, Special Projects and Moorpark Redevelopment Agency (MRA) —
Debt Service. All of which are considered to be major funds. Data from the remaining governmental funds are
combined into a single, aggregated presentation. Individual fund data for each of these non -major governmental funds
is provided in the form of combining statements in the non -major governmental funds section of this report.
The City adopts an annual budget for all its funds. A budgetary comparison statement is provided for all funds with an
annually adopted budget to demonstrate compliance with their respective budgets. The budgetary comparison
116
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
statements are located in the basic financial statements. The non -major governmental fund budgetary comparisons are
located in the non -major governmental funds section of the report.
Fiduciary Funds. Fiduciary funds, which consist solely of trust and agency funds, are used to account for resources
held for the benefit of parties outside the government. Fiduciary funds are not reflected in the government -wide
financial statements because the resources of the fund are not available to support the City's own programs. Fiduciary
funds are custodial in nature and, therefore, the accounting used does not involve the measurement of the results of
operations. The basic fiduciary fund financial statement can be found on page 25 of this report.
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements The notes to the basic financial statements provide additional information
that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government -wide and fund financial statements. The
notes to the basic financial statements can be found on pages 27 -65 of this report.
GOVERNMENT -WIDE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The City has continued to present its financial statements under the reporting model required by GASB 34. A
comparative analysis of the government -wide data has been included in this report.
As noted earlier, net assets may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government's financial position. In the case
of the City, assets exceeded liabilities by $239.7 million at the close of the current fiscal year.
The City's net assets invested in capital assets, net of related debt reflects a positive $130.6 million. As shown on
Table 1, the largest portion of the City's net assets (55 %) is its investment in capital assets. The City uses these capital
assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending.
An additional portion of the City's net assets (43 %) represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on how
they may be used. The major restrictions on net assets are funding source restrictions. The remaining balance of total
net assets (2 %) is unrestricted and may be used to meet the City's obligations to citizens and creditors in accordance
with the finance- related legal requirements reflected in the City's fund structure. At the end of the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2008, the City reported positive balances in all three categories of net assets, both for the City as a whole, as
well as for its separate governmental activities.
117
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
Table 1
Net Assets
Governmental Activities
As of June 30, 2009 and 2008
2009 2008
Assets:
Current and other assets $ 145,680,876 $ 145,749,306
Capital assets 130,581,499 130,071,108
Total Assets 276,262,375 275,820,414
Liabilities:
Long -term debt outstanding 29,942,239 30,960,807
Other liabilities 6,646,441 9,533,958
Total Liabilities 36,588,680 40,494,765
Net Assets:
Invested in capital assets,
net of related debt 130,581,499 130,071,108
Restricted 94,878,693 101,613,368
Unrestricted 14,213,503 3,641,173
Total Net Assets $ 239,673,695 $ 235,325,649
The City's net assets increased by $4.3 million during the current fiscal year.
6
M'
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
Table 2
Changes in Net Assets
Governmental Activities
As of June 30, 2009 and 2008
Revenues
Program Revenues:
Charges for services
Operating contributions and grants
Capital contributions and grants
General Revenues:
Property taxes
Tax increment
Franchise taxes
Sales taxes
Sales tax in lieu
Motor vehicle in lieu tax
Investment income
Other
Special Item — County Settlement
Total Revenues
Expenses
General government
Public safety
Public services
Parks and recreation
Interest on long -term debt
Total Expenses
Increase in net assets
Net assets - July 1,
Prior Period Adjustment
Net assets - June 30,
WA
2009
$ 4,589,249
6,172,315
3,326,778
7,802,643
7,054,432
1,171,556
2,329,522
849,227
125,307
2,875,649
386,040
1,000,000
37,682,718
2,041,596
7,035,3 84
18,170,325
4,470,524
1,616,843
33,334,672
4,348,046
235,325,649
S 239,673,695
2008
$ 7,416,792
7,113,883
5,481,972
4,505,980
6,887,079
1,150,180
2,306,281
779,263
3,038,440
2,491,856
139,728
41,311,454
1,949,206
6,882,072
20,580,204
4,551,045
1,773,841
35,736,368
5,575,086
233,008,403
(3,257,840)
$ 235,325,649
119
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
Capital
contributions and
grants
24'
Program Revenues
Charges for
services
33%
Operating
contributions and
grants
43%
General Revenues
Special Item:
Investment income Other County Settlement
12% <0% 4%
Motor vehicle in
Lieu tax
1%
Sales tax in lieu
4%
Sales taxes
10%
Property taxes
32%
Franchise taxes
5%
Tax increment
30%
8
120
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE CITY'S MAJOR FUNDS
As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to demonstrate compliance with finance- related legal
requirements.
Governmental Funds. The focus of the City's governmental funds is to provide information on near -term inflows,
outflows, and balances of spendable resources. Such information is useful in assessing the City's financial
requirements. In particular unreserved fund balance may serve as a useful measure of a government's net
resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year.
As of the end of the current fiscal year, the City's governmental funds reported total fund balances of
$135,208,035. This is an increase of $2,261,427 in comparison with the prior year. Approximately $101.1
million or 75% of the fund balances constitutes unreserved fund balance, which is available to meet the City's
current and future needs. The remainder of fund balance is reserved to indicate that it is not available for new
spending because it has been committed to a variety of restricted purposes.
General Fund
The General Fund is the chief operating fund of the City. At the end of the current fiscal year, the total fund
balance of the General Fund was $3.2 million which is a decrease of $0.5 million or 14% from the prior year. As
a measure of the General Fund's liquidity, it may be useful to compare total fund balance to total fund
expenditures. Total fund balance represents 22% of total General Fund expenditures and transfers out. This is a
healthy reserve.
Key factors in this growth when compared to FY 2007 -08 are as follows:
• The City's share of property taxes increased by approximately $3.1 million as a result of reclassifying
certain vehicle license fee in lieu revenue as property taxes.
• Sales tax revenues also improved with an increase of approximately $93,000, which is a reflection of
increased sales from various business groups and an increase in the "triple flip" from the State.
• Interest earnings decreased by approximately $65,000 in response to declining rates in the market.
• Motor vehicle in lieu decreased by approximately $2.9 million as a result of reclassifying certain vehicle
license fee in lieu revenue as property taxes.
• Expenditures and transfers out ended the year approximately $1.7 million under budget as a result of
prudent spending by staff and capital projects that have not yet started.
Street and Traffic Safety Fund (Includes the Traffic System Management Fund, City -Wide Traffic
Mitigation Fund and Crossing Guard Fund)
The fund balance of the Street and Traffic Safety Fund increased by $0.9 million from the prior year, primarily
due to the receipt of development fees for various construction projects.
Community Development Fund
The fund balance of the Community Development Fund increased by $0.4 million from the prior year as a result
of increased transfers from the General Fund to support this operation.
0
121
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
Assessment District Fund
The fund balance of the Assessment District Fund increased by $1.9 million from the prior year due to transfers
from the General Fund.
Endowment Fund
The fund balance of the Endowment Fund decreased by $2.9 million, due to a transfer to the City Hall Building
Capital Projects Fund.
Park/Public Facilities Fund (Includes ten (10) various development fee related funds)
The fund balance of the Park Improvement Fund decreased by $0.6 million primarily due to increased capital
expenditures.
MRA Area 1 Operations Fund
The fund balance of the MRA Area 1 Operations Fund increased by $4 million from the prior year due to a
transfer from the Redevelopment Agency Capital Projects Fund.
Police Facilities Fund
The fund balance of the Police Facilities Fund increased by $0.1 million from the prior year.
Moorpark Highlands Improvement Fund
The Moorpark Highland Improvement Fund is one of six accounts held by the Fiscal Agent for the Community
Facilities District (CFD) No. 2004 -1 (Moorpark Highlands) Special Tax Bonds 2006. The Improvement account
has been recorded under a capital projects fund to reflect the proceeds that have been designated for capital
improvement projects. Bond proceeds of $34 million have been deposited into this fund. The expenditures of $4
million represent payments to Pardee homes for reimbursement of improvements and grading in the district. The
debt service portion of this bond issue has been recorded as an agency fund. Note that the City of Moorpark is
not obligated in any manner for this bond issue and is only limited to acting as an agent for the assessed
property owners and bondholders.
Redevelopment Agency Capital Projects Fund
The fund balance of the Redevelopment Agency Capital Projects Fund decreased by $5.4 million from the
previous year mainly due to a transfer to the Redevelopment Agency Area 1 Operations Fund.
Special Projects Capital Projects Fund
The fund balance of the Special Projects Capital Projects Fund increased by $2 million from the previous year
solely due to a transfer from the General Fund.
10
122
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
RDA Debt Service Fund
The fund balance of the Redevelopment Agency Debt Service Fund increased by $0.5 million due to the increased
transfer out to the Redevelopment Agency Capital Projects Fund.
Non -Major Governmental Funds
The fund balance of all other Non -Major Governmental Funds increased by $6.1 million from the previous fiscal
year.
General Fund Budgetary Highlights
The City adopts annual appropriated operating budgets for its governmental funds (General Fund, Special
Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds, and Capital Project Funds (except for the Moorpark Highlands Improvement
Fund as these sources have been designated for specific projects in accordance with the Bonds' Official
Statement) and reports the results of operation on a budget comparison basis.
In preparing its budgets, the City attempts to estimate its revenues using realistic, but conservative, methods so as
to budget its expenditure appropriations and activities in a prudent manner. As a result, the City Council adopts
budget adjustments during the course of the fiscal year to reflect both changed priorities and availability of
additional revenues to allow for expansion of existing programs. During the course of the year, the City Council
amended the originally adopted budget to re- appropriate prior year approved projects and expenditures, as well as
approving many other adjustments for the current year.
The results of the General Fund for the year ended June 30, 2009, were right in line with the budget. Revenues
were $736,000 greater than the budget and expenditures and transfers out ended the year under budget.
CAPITAL ASSET AND LONG -TERM LIABILITIES
Capital Assets. The City's investment in capital assets as of June 30, 2009, amounted to $130.6 million (net of
accumulated depreciation). This investment, detailed in Table 3, includes land, construction in progress,
buildings and improvements, machinery and equipment, and infrastructure. The total increase in the City's
investment in capital assets for the current fiscal year was 0.4 %. Buildings and improvements show the largest
increase in 2009 at $1.7 million.
11
123
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
Table 3
Capital Assets (net of depreciation)
Governmental Activities
As of June 30, 2009 and 2008
2009 2008
Land $ 28,719,337 $ 28,719,337
Construction in Progress 9,903,188 9,970,434
Buildings and improvements 25,393,673 23,643,388
Machinery and equipment 1,982,243 1,519,510
Infrastructure 64,583,058 66,218,439
Total $ 130,581,499 $ 130,071,108
As a result of the implementation of GASB No. 34, the City has continued to account for infrastructure assets on
its financial statements. The accompanying government -wide financial statements include those infrastructure
assets that were either completed during the current fiscal year or considered construction in progress at current
fiscal year -end.
Additional information on the City's capital assets can be found in Note 5 on page 48 of this report.
Long -term Liabilities
At the end of the current fiscal year, the City's long -term liability outstanding is $30.9 million. This is comprised
of $28.9 million in tax allocation bonded indebtedness, $0.6 million in employee compensated absences payable
and $1.4 million for pension related debt.
Table 4
Outstanding Long -Term Liabilities
Governmental Activities
As of June 30, 2009 and 2008
Tax Allocation Bonds
(issued by the Redevelopment Agency)
Employee Compensated Absences
Pension Related Debt
Total
12
$ 28,906,716 $ 29,370,869
642,256
1,357,356
665,389
1,388,702
$ 30,906,328 $ 31,424,960
124
CITY OF MOORPARK
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
JUNE 30, 2009
The City of Moorpark's total liabilities decreased by $0.5 million or 1.7% during the current fiscal year. The
decrease is attributable to the normal pay down of principal on the outstanding debt.
Additional information on the City's long -term liabilities can be found in Note 6 on pages 49 thru 53 of the basic
financial statements.
ECONOMIC FACTORS AND NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET
The State's "Triple Flip" payment plan remains in effect as the state attempts to repay the $15.0 billion deficit
reduction bonds. The impact to the City of Moorpark will be on cash flow and the subsequent reduction in
interest income due to biannual (catch -up payments) rather than monthly sales tax payments. In addition, the
State's budget for Fiscal Year 2009/10 and 2010/11 currently show a deficit in the billions. The State has not
adopted a strategy to reduce this projected deficit. The City anticipates the State taking away property tax
revenue from the redevelopment agency and Proposition 42 monies.
General purpose revenues such as property tax and sales tax are anticipated to decrease in fiscal year 2009/10.
The sales tax decrease is a reflection of the economic recession plus the addition of new tenants to fill spaces in
the Campus Plaza, Village at Moorpark, Warehouse Discount Center, Moorpark Grove and Mountain Meadows
Plaza shopping centers, increasing the City's sales tax revenue.
Additionally, the City took into consideration the following factors in preparing the budget for fiscal year
2009/10:
• Interest income will show a decrease in response to declining interest rates.
0 Slight decrease in PERS retirement cost from 11.607% to 10.990% effective July 1, 2009.
Projections indicate our cost for general liability insurance will increase by 30% and earthquake and flood
insurance is expected to decrease by 13% for FY 2009/10 when compared to fiscal year 2008/09 actual
payments.
A priority of the City is to maintain a high quality of services while adopting a balanced budget. As in prior
years, the 2009/10 budget as adopted by the City Council is a balanced budget and will serve as a guide in
planning for the future.
REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
This management's discussion and analysis is designed to provide citizens, taxpayers, customers, investors, and
creditors with a general overview of the City's finances and to demonstrate the City's accountability for the
money it receives. If you have questions or need additional financial information, please contact the Finance
Department at City Hall, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, CA 93021, or at www.ci.moorpark.ca.us.
13
125
This page intentionally left blank
126
BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
127
City of Moorpark
Statement of Net Assets
June 30, 2009
ASSETS
Cash and Investments
Receivables:
Taxes
Accounts
Interest
Notes and Loans
Prepaid Items
Property Held for Resale/Development
Restricted Cash and Investments
Debt Issuance Costs
Capital Assets:
Non - Depreciable:
Land
Construction in Progress
Depreciable, Net of Accumulated Depreciation:
Buildings and Improvements
Machinery and Equipment
Infrastructure
Total Assets
LIABILITIES
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities
Interest Payable
Unearned Revenue
Due to Agency Funds
Noncurrent Liabilities:
Due Within One Year
Due in More Than One Year
Total Liabilities
NET ASSETS
Invested in Capital Assets
Restricted for:
Public Services
Recreation Services
Public Safety
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Unrestricted
Total Net Assets
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
14
Governmental
Activities
$ 104,179,611
695,717
776,708
1,707,151
3,504,672
378,409
17,814,168
16,160,984
463,456
28,719,337
9,903,188
25,393,673
1,982,243
64,583,058
276,262,375
5,206,621
347,022
107,177
21,532
964,089
29,942,239
36,588,680
130,581,499
82,879,987
4,554,690
498,827
6,945,189
14,213,503
$ 239,673,695
128
City of Moorpark
Statement of Activities
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Functions/Programs
Expenses
Primary Government:
Governmental Activities:
General Government
$ 2,041,596
Public Safety
7,035,384
Public Services
18,170,325
Parks and Recreation
4,470,524
Interest on Long -Term Debt
1,616,843
Program Revenues
Charges Operating Capital Net
for Grants and Grants and Governmental
Services Contributions Contributions Activities
$ 232,926 $ 48,807 $
538,636 64,677
3,172,708 2,446,735
644,979 3,612,096
3,326,778
Total Governmental Activities $ 33,334,672 $ 4,589,249 $ 6,172,315 $ 3,326,778
General Revenues:
Taxes:
Property Tax, Levied for General Purpose
Property Tax, Redevelopment Agency Tax
Increment
Franchise Taxes
Sales Tax
Sales Tax In -Lieu
Motor Vehicle In -Lieu, unrestricted
Investment Income
Other
Special Items:
County Settlement
Total General Revenues
Change in Net Assets
Net Assets - Beginning of Year
Net Assets - End of Year
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
15
$ (1,759,863)
(6,432,071)
(9,224,104)
(213,449)
(1,616,843)
(19-246-330)
7,802,643
7,054,432
1,171,556
2,329,522
849,227
125,307
2,875,649
386,040
1,000,000
23,594,376
4,348,046
235,325,649
$ 239,673,695
129
ASSETS
Cash and Investments
Restricted Cash and Investments
Receivables:
Taxes
Accounts
Interest
Notes and Loans
Due From Other Funds
Prepaid Items
Property Held for Resale/Development
Total Assets
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities
Due to Other Funds
Due to Agency Funds
Deferred Revenue
Total Liabilities
Fund Balances:
Reserved for:
Capital Projects
Debt Service
Property Held for Resale/Development
Prepaid Items
Unreserved, Reported In:
General Fund
Special Revenue Funds
Capital Projects Funds
Debt Service Funds
Total Fund Balances
Total Liabilities and
Fund Balances
City of Moorpark
Balance Sheet
Governmental Funds
June 30, 2009
Special Revenue
Street and Community Assessment
General Traffic Safety Development District
$ 2,212,671 $ 19,671,937 $ 232,806 $ 6,488,096
678,233 17,484
111,865 609 59,851
365,212
389,348
373,209
$ 4,130,538 $ 19,671,937 $ 233,415 $ 6,565,431
$ 848,600 $ 11,390 $ 233,415 $ 119,322
54,577
21,532
17,484
924,709 11,390 233,415 136,806
373,209
2,832,620
19,660,547 6,428,625
3,205,829 19,660,547
6,428,625
$ 4,130,538 $ 19,671,937 $ 233,415 $ 6,565,431
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement
16 130
Special Revenue Capital Projects
Moorpark
Parks/Public MRA Area 1 Police Highlands Redevelopment
Endowment Facilities Operations Facilities Fee Improvement Agency
$ 2,838,312 $ 4,783,985 $ 5,019,531 $ $ $ 14,124,781
14,014,926
9,171 17,952 3,330
1,253,181 88,758
800,000 1,704,786
1,943,495 54,577 350,000
9,117,374 2,041,544
$ 5,581,807 $ 4,793,156 $ 17,167,401 $ - $ 14,014,926 $ 16,608,413
$ 4,141 $ 238,466 $ 3,114,659 $
120,301 1,995,668
800,000 2,957,967
804,141 238,466 6,192,927 1,995,668
9,117,374
4,777,666 4,554,690 1,857,100
(1,995,668)
14,014,926
$ 302,455
17,286
319,741
2,041,544
14,247,128
4,777,666 4,554,690 10,974,474 (1,995,668) 14,014,926 16,288,672
$ 5,581,807 $ 4,793,156 $ 17,167,401 $ - $ 14,014,926 $ 16,608,413
Continued
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
17
131
City of Moorpark
Balance Sheet
Governmental Funds - Continued
June 30, 2009
Capital Projects Debt Service
Non -Major Total
Special Redevelopment Governmental Governmental
Projects Agency Funds Funds
ASSETS
Cash and Investments
Restricted Cash and Investments
Receivables:
Taxes
Accounts
Interest
Notes and Loans
Due From Other Funds
Prepaid Items
Property Held for Resale/Development
Total Assets
$ 23,448,369 $ $ 25,359,123
$ 104,179,611
2,146,058
16,160,984
695,717
573,930
776,708
1,707,151
999,886
3,504,672
194,242
2,931,662
5,200
378,409
6,655,250
17,814,168
$ 23,448,369 $ 2,146,058 $ 33,787,631 $ 148,149,082
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities $
Due to Other Funds
Due to Agency Funds
Deferred Revenue
Total Liabilities
Fund Balances:
Reserved for:
Capital Projects
Debt Service
Property Held for Resale/Development
Prepaid Items
Unreserved, Reported In:
General Fund
Special Revenue Funds
Capital Projects Funds
Debt Service Funds
Total Fund Balances
Total Liabilities and
Fund Balances
$ 334,173
$ 5,206,621
743,830
2,931,662
21,532
1,005,781
4,781,232
- 2,083,784
12,941,047
14,014,926
1,884,722 1,884,722
6,655,250 17,814,168
5,200 378,409
2,832,620
20,662,730 57,941,358
23,448,369 4,380,667 40,080,496
261,336 261,336
23,448,369 2,146,058 31,703,847 135,208,035
$ 23,448,369 $ 2,146,058 $ 33,787,631 $ 148,149,082
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
18
132
City of Moorpark
Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds - Balance Sheet
to the Statement of Net Assets
June 30, 2009
Fund balances of governmental funds $ 135,208,035
Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net assets
are different because:
Capital assets of governmental activities are not financial resources and, therefore,
are not reported in the governmenal funds. 130,581,499
Long -term notes and loans receivable are not current financial resources and,
therefore, are deferred in the governmental funds. 3,379,158
Revenues not received soon enough after year -end to be considered available are
deferred in the funds. The availability criteria does not apply to the government -
wide financial statements. 1,294,897
Interest expenditures are recognized when due, and therefore, interest payable is
not recorded in the governmental funds. (347,022)
Long -term liabilities are not due and payable in the current period and are not
reported in the funds.
Compensated Absences (642,256)
Tax Allocation Bonds (29,205,000)
Unamortized Discount 298,284
Pension Related Debt (1,357,356)
Issuance costs net of accumulated amortization were recorded as expenditures
in the governmental funds. 463,456
Net assets of governmental activities $ 239,673,695
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement
19
133
City of Moorpark j
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Governmental Funds
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Special Revenue
Street and Community Assessment
General Traffic Safety Development District
REVENUES
Taxes
Licenses and Permits
Fines and Forfeitures
Use of Money and Property
Charges for Services
Intergovernmental
Maintenance Assessments
Other Revenue
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
General Government
Public Safety
Public Services
Parks and Recreation
Capital Outlay
Debt Service:
Principal
Interest
$ 10,880,716
$ $
$
88,308
556,702
186,809
6,148
1,000,429
474,772
138, 105
766,713
586,421 1,080,455
155,043
19,323
3,450,229
269,864
4,777
13,367,205
1,061,193 1,643,305
3,593,111
1,926,283
6,253,223
414,949 61,240
1,436,923
90,725 90,147
2,413,472
311,770
2,745,168
25,721
Total Expenditures 10,122,103 151,387 2,413,472 3,082,659
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures 3,245,102 909,806 (770,167) 510,452
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer In 464,718 1,162,972 1,357,750
Transfer Out (4,311,166) (29,017) (10,000)
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
SPECIAL ITEMS
County Settlement
Net Change in Fund Balances
Fund Balances, Beginning of Year
Fund Balances, End of Year
(3,846,448) (29,017) 1,162,972 1,347,750
(601,346) 880,789 392,805 1,858,202
3,807,175 18,779,758 (392,805) 4,570,423
$ 3,205,829 $ 19,660,547 $ - $ 6,428,625
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
20 134
Special Revenue Capital Projects
Moorpark
Parks/Public MRA Area 1 Police Highlands Redevelopment
Endowment Facilities Operations Facilities Fee Improvement Agency
82,606
428,101
141,882
361,055
44,595
70,492 403,316
22,423
11,546 69,295 6,990
510,707 514,483 113,890 22,423 70,492 410,306
74,302
26,605 1,455,487 113,289
51,343 1,089,263 347,509 4,034,153 813,288
51,343 1,115,868 1,802,996 74,302 4,034,153 926,577
459,364 (601,385) (1,689,106) (51,879) (3,963,661) (516,271)
5,777,516
(3,368,697) (48,273)
(3,368,697) - 5,729,243
(4,863,609)
(4,863,609)
(2,909,333) (601,385) 4,040,137 (51,879) (3,963,661) (5,379,880)
7,686,999 5,156,075 6,934,337 (1,943,789) 17,978,587 21,668,552
$ 4,777,666 $ 4,554,690 $ 10,974,474 $ (1,995,668) $ 14,014,926 $ 16,288,672
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement 21 Continued
135
City of Moorpark
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Governmental Funds - Continued
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Capital Projects Debt Service
Non -Major
Special Redevelopment Governmental
Projects Agency Funds
REVENUES
Taxes $
Licenses and Permits
Fines and Forfeitures
Use of Money and Property
Charges for Services
Intergovernmental
Maintenance Assessments
Other Revenue
Total Revenues -
EXPENDITURES
Current:
General Government
Public Safety
Public Services
Parks and Recreation
Capital Outlay
Debt Service:
Principal
Interest
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer In
Transfer Out
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
SPECIAL ITEMS
County Settlement
Net Change in Fund Balances
Fund Balances, Beginning of Year
Fund Balances, End of Year
Total
Governmental
Funds
$ 7,054,432 $ 1,781,488
$ 19,716,636
475,000
645,010
291,973
484,930
224,688 533,996
3,114,881
590,414
3,813,159
3,793,016
3,948,059
1,849,906
3,491,975
36,067
398,539
7,279,120 7,026,954 35,613,189
1,926,283
175,130 6,814,425
3,366,958 3,407,297 11,259,297
4,182,091
1,558,455 8,100,604
475,000
475,000
1,557,896
36,166
1,594,062
- 5,399,854
5,177,048
34,351,762
- 1,879,266
1,849,906
1,261,427
1,969,504 152,117
6,178,073
17,062,650
(2,515,766)
(1,916,122)
(17,062,650)
1,969,504 (2,363,649) 4,261,951
1,000,000 1,000,000
1,969,504 515,617 6,111,857 2,261,427
21,478, 865 1,630,441 25,591,990 132,946,608
$ 23,448,369 $ 2,146,058 $ 31,703,847 $ 135,208,035
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
22 136
City of Moorpark
Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in
Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Net change in fund balances -total governmental funds $ 2,261,427
Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are different because:
Governmental funds report capital outlays as expenditures. However, in the statement
of activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over ther estimated useful lives as
depreciation expense or are allocated to the appropriate functional expense when
the cost is below the capitalization threshold. This activity is reconciled as follows:
Cost of assets capitalized 3,789,980
Depreciation expense (3,261,709)
Governmental funds report only proceeds from the sale of capital assets. The
statement of activities reports a gain or loss on disposal based on the net book value
at the time of disposal. Disposal activity included the following:
Costs of assets disposed (92,475)
Accumulated depreciation on disposed assets 74,595
Long -term notes and loans receivable are reported as expenditures when made and as
revenue when repaid in the governmental funds. However, there is no impact in the
statement of activities when notes and loans are made or repaid. This amount
represents the net change in the long -term notes and loans receivable. 15,147
Revenues not received soon enough after year -end to be considered available are
deferred in the funds. The availability criteria does not apply to the government -wide
financial statements. 1,054,383
The issuance of long -term debt provides current financial resources to governmental
funds, while the repayment of the principal of long -term debt consumes the current
financial resources of governmental funds. Neither transaction, however, has any
effect on net assets. Also governmental funds report the effect of issuance costs,
premiums, discounts, and similar items when debt is first issued, whereas these
amounts are deferred and amortized in the statement of activities. This amount is the
net effect of these differences in the treatment of long -term debt and related items. 478,646
Accrued interest for tax allocation bonds is not recorded in the governmental funds.
This is the net change in accrued interest for the current period. 4,919
Compensated absence expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require
the use of current financial resources and, therefore, are not reported as expenditures
in governmental funds. 23,133
Change in net assets of governmental activities $ 4,348,046
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
23
137
City of Moorpark
Statement of Fiduciary Assets and Liabilities
Agency Funds
June 30, 2009
ASSETS
Cash and Investments
Restricted Cash and Investments
Accounts Receivable
Due From Other Funds
Total Assets
LIABILITIES
Accounts Payable
Deposits
Due to Bondholders
Total Liabilities
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
24
$ 3,297,388
6,507,445
26,323
21,532
9,852,688
182,046
3,116,619
6,554,023
$ 9,852,688
138
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
NOTE
DESCRIPTION
PAGE
1
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
26-35
2
Cash and Investments
36-41
3
Notes and Loans Receivable
42-44
4
Interfund Transactions
44-46
5
Capital Assets and Depreciation
46-47
6
Long -Term Liabilities
48-52
7
Agreements with Various Taxing Agencies
52-54
8
Retirement Plan
55
9
Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB)
55-57
10
Conduit Debt - Revenue Bonds
58
11
Special Assessment Bonds
58-59
12
Risk Management
59-61
13
Classification of Net Assets and Fund Balance
61-63
14
Expenditures in Excess of Appropriations
63
15
Commitments and Contingencies /Subsequent Events
64
16
Special Items
64
25 139
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The accounting policies of the City of Moorpark (City) conform to accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America as applicable to governments. The Governmental Accounting
Standards Board (GASB) is the accepted standard setting body for governmental accounting and
financial reporting principles. The following is a summary of the significant policies.
A) Reporting Entity
The reporting entity "City of Moorpark" includes the accounts of the City, the Moorpark
Redevelopment Agency (Agency), the Moorpark Public Financing Authority (PFA), and the
Industrial Development Authority of the City of Moorpark (IDA).
The City was incorporated in July, 1983 as a general law city and operates under a
Council/Manager form of government.
The Agency was formed in 1987 pursuant to the State of California Health and Safety Code,
Section 33000 entitled "Community Redevelopment Law". Its purpose is to finance long -term
capital improvements designed to eliminate physical and economic blight in a project area
The PFA was formed in 1993 as a joint powers authority between the City and the Agency in order
to provide financial assistance to the City and the Agency by issuing debt and financing the
construction of public facilities.
The IDA was formed in 1985 pursuant to the California Industrial Development Financing Act (the
ACT). Its purpose is to finance the acquisition and development of certain industrial activities as
permitted by the Act and to issue bonds for the purpose of enabling industrial firms to finance the
cost of such activities.
The criteria used in determining the scope of the reporting entity are based on the provisions of
GASB Statement No. 14 (as amended by GASB Statement No. 39). The City of Moorpark is the
primary government unit. Component units are those entities which are financially accountable. to
the primary govemment, either because the City appoints a voting majority of the component unit's
Board, or because the component unit will provide a financial benefit or impose a financial burden
on the City.
The City has accounted for the Agency, the PFA, and IDA as "blended" component units. Despite
being legally separate, they are so intertwined with the City, they are in substance, part of the City's
operations. Accordingly, the balances and transactions of the Agency are reported as separate funds
in the Special Revenue, Debt Service, and Capital Projects Funds. The PFA and IDA are inactive.
26 140
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - Continued
A) Reporting Entity - Continued
The following specific criteria were used in determining that the Agency, the PFA, and the IDA are
"blended" component unit:
1) The members of the City Council also act as the governing body of the Agency, the PFA, and
the IDA.
2) The City, the Agency, the PFA, and the IDA are financially interdependent. The City makes
loans to the Agency for use on redevelopment projects. Available property tax revenues of the
Agency will be used to repay the loans from the City.
3) The Agency, the PFA, and the IDA are managed by employees of the City.
The financial statements for the Agency may be obtained at the City's administrative offices. The
PFA and IDA do not issue separate financial statements.
B) Accounting and Reporting Policies
The City has conformed to the pronouncements of the GASB, which are the primary authoritative
statements of the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
applicable to state and local governments. In accordance with GASB Statements No. 20, the City
applies all applicable Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) pronouncements issued on or
before November 30, 1989, unless any such pronouncements contradict GASB pronouncements.
C) Description of Funds
The accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a separate
accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for with a separate set of self -
balancing accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues, and expenditures. The
following are types of funds used:
Governmental Fund Types
General Fund - Used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted
for in another fund.
Special Revenue Funds - Used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are
restricted by law or administrative action for specified purposes.
27
141
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - Continued
C) Description of Funds - Continued
Debt Service Funds - The debt service fund is used to account for property tax increment revenue
and related interest income. Disbursements from this fund consist mainly of principal and interest
on indebtedness.
Capital Projects Funds - Used to account for financial resources used for the construction of
specific capital projects.
Fiduciary Fund Tune
Agency Funds - Used to account for assets held by the City as an agent for individuals, private
organizations, other governments and/or other funds.
D) Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus
Government -Wide Financial Statements
The City's Government -Wide Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Assets and a
Statement of Activities. These statements present summaries of Governmental Activities for the
City.
These statements are presented on an "economic resources" measurement focus and the accrual
basis of accounting. Accordingly, all of the City's assets and liabilities, including capital assets and
infrastructure as well as long -term debt, are included in the accompanying Statement of Net Assets.
The Statement of Activities presents changes in net .assets. Under the accrual basis of accounting,
revenues are recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenditures are recognized in
the period in which the liability is incurred. The Statement of Activities demonstrates the degree to
which the direct expenses of a given function are offset by program revenues. Direct expenses are
those that are clearly identifiable with a specific function. The types of transactions reported as
program revenues for the City are reported in three categories: 1) charges for services, 2) operating
contributions and grants, and 3) capital grants and contributions. Charges for services include
revenues from customers or applicants who purchase, use, or directly benefit from goods, services,
or privileges provided by a given function. Operating contributions and grants include revenues
restricted to meeting the requirements of a particular operating function and may include state
shared revenues and grants. Capital contributions and grants include revenues restricted to meeting
28 142
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - Continued
D) Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus - Continued
the requirements of a particular capital function and may include grants and developer fees. Taxes
and other items not properly included among program revenues are reported instead as general
revenues.
Certain eliminations have been made as prescribed by GASB Statement No. 34 in regards to
interfund activities, payables, and receivables. All internal balances in the government -wide
financial statements have been eliminated.
Governmental Fund Financial Statements
Governmental fund financial statements include a Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues,
Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances for all major governmental funds and aggregated non-
major funds. An accompanying schedule is presented to reconcile and explain the differences in
fund balances as presented in these statements to the net assets presented in the Government -Wide
Financial Statements. The City has presented all major funds that met qualifications of GASB
Statement No. 34. In addition, the City has included funds that are significant to the City as major
funds.
All governmental funds are accounted for on a spending or "current financial resources"
measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, only current assets
and current liabilities are included on the Balance Sheets. The Statement of Revenues,
Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances presents increases (revenues and other financing
sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in fund balances. Revenues are
recognized in the accounting period in which they become susceptible to accrual, that is, when they
become both measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current period. "Measurable"
means that the amount of the transaction can be determined, and "available" means collectible
within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period.
Accrued revenues included property taxes received within 60 days after year -end taxpayer assessed
taxes such as sales taxes, and earnings on investments. Grant funds earned but not received are
recorded as a receivable, and grant funds received before the revenue recognition criteria have been
met are reported as deferred revenues. Expenditures are recorded when the fund liability is
incurred, if measurable, except for unmatured interest on general long -term debt, which is
recognized when due.
29
143
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - Continued
D) Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus - Continued
The City reports the following major governmental funds:
The General Fund is the government's primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial
resources of the City, except those required to be accounted for in another fund.
The Street and Traffic Safety Special Revenue Fund is used to account for fees used for street
maintenance, right -of -way acquisition and street construction.
The Community Development Special Revenue Fund is used to account for fees used in planning,
building and safety, and engineering services relating to community development.
The Assessment District Special Revenue Fund is used to account for funds received by the City
for maintenance of community -wide landscaping.
The Endowment Special Revenue Fund is used to account for funds received by the City for certain
development projects or other sources directed by the City Council to be held for the purpose of
one -time capital expenditure of community -wide benefit due to the impact of additional
development.
The Parks/Public Facilities Special Revenue Fund is used to account for fees used for park and
public facilities improvements as a result of additional development.
The MRA Area 1 Operations Special Revenue Fund is used to account for monies received and
expended within the project area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan of the Agency made
pursuant to redevelopment laws of the State of California.
The Police Facilities Fee Capital Projects Fund is used to account for the funds used to build the
new police facility.
The Moorpark Highlands Improvement Capital Projects Fund is used to account for the receipt and
expenditure of the CFD No. 2004 -1 special tax bonds proceeds.
The Redevelopment Agency Capital Projects Fund is used to account for the funds used for the
Agency's capital improvement projects.
30 144
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - Continued
D) Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus - Continued
The Special Projects Fund is used to account for various City capital improvement projects.
The Redevelopment Agency Debt Service Fund is used to account for the accumulation of
resources for, and the payment of principal and interest on the Agency's debt and other long -term
obligations.
Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements
Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Assets. The fiduciary fund is used
to report assets held in a trustee or agency capacity for others and therefore are not available to
support City programs. Since these assets are being held for the benefit of a third party, these funds
are not incorporated into the government -wide statements.
The City's only fiduciary fund is an agency fund, which uses the accrual basis of accounting to
account for amounts held for individuals, private organizations, other governments, and/or other
funds. The agency fund is custodial in nature (assets equal liabilities) and therefore does not
involve measurement of results of operations.
E) Budgetary Accounting
Annual budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with GAAP for all governmental funds. All
annual appropriations lapse at fiscal year -end. Throughout the year, the City Council made several
supplementing budgetary adjustments to the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Capital
Projects Funds, and the Debt Service Fund. These adjustments resulted -in a net appropriation
increase, of $6,148,975. This increase resulted primarily from additional appropriations to various
construction in progress projects, acquisition of CALTRANS property and rebudgeted projects and
amounts carried over from Fiscal Year 2007/2008 as continuing appropriations. The City did not
budget for revenues and expenditures for the Moorpark Highland Improvement and Special
Projects Capital Projects Funds.
F) Investments
The City has adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB)
Statement No. 31, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Certain Investments and External
Pools, which requires governmental entities to report certain investments at fair value in the balance
sheet and recognize the corresponding change in the fair value of investments in the year in which
31
145
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements ,
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - Continued
F) Investments - Continued
the change occurred. In accordance with GASB Statement No. 31, the City has adjusted certain
investments to fair value (when material).
Investments are included within the financial statement classifications of "cash and investments"
and "restricted cash and investments," and are stated at fair value.
G) Property Held for Resale/Development
Property held for resale in the MRA Area 1 Operations Fund, Low and Moderate Income Housing
Special Revenue Fund and the Capital Projects Fund represent land and buildings purchased by the
Agency. Such property is valued at the lower of cost or estimated net realizable value (as
determined by a disposition and development agreement between the Agency and a developer) and
has been offset by reservation of fund balance to indicate that assets constitute future capital
projects and are not available spendable resources. The balance at June 30, 2009 was $17,814,168.
H) Capital Assets
Capital assets, which include land, machinery and equipment (vehicles, computers, etc), buildings
and improvements, and infrastructure assets (street systems, storm drains, sewer systems, etc.), are
reported in the Governmental Activities column of the Government -wide Financial Statements.
Capital assets are defined by the City as all land; buildings and improvements with an
initialindividual cost of more than $10,000; vehicles, computers and equipment with an initial
individual cost of more than $5,000; and improvements and infrastructure assets with costs of more
than $100,000. Such assets are recorded at historical cost or estimated historical cost if purchased
or constructed. Donated or annexed capital assets are recorded at estimated market value at the date
of donation or annexation.
The costs of normal maintenance and repairs that do not add to the value of the asset or materially
extend assets lives are not capitalized. Depreciation is recorded in the Government -wide Financial
Statements on a straight -line basis over the useful life of the assets as follows:
Building and Improvements 25 to 50 years
Vehicles, Computers, and equipment 3 to 20 years
Infrastructure Assets
Roadway Network 7 to 100 years
Drain Network 20 to 100 years
Parks and Recreation Network 50 years
32 146
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - Continued
I) Deferred Revenue
Deferred revenue is recorded for monies collected in advance that have not been earned. In the
fund financial statements revenue is also deferred when the availability criteria has not been met.
As of June 30, 2009, the total unearned revenue amounted to $107,177 and unavailable revenue
amounted to $4,674,055.
J) Long -Term Debt
In the government -wide financial statements, long -term debt and other obligations are reported as
liabilities in the statement of net assets. Bonds payable are reported net of the applicable bond
premium or discount. Bond issuance costs are reported as deferred charges and amortized over the
term of the related debt. In the fund financial statements, governmental fund types recognize bond
premiums and discounts, as well as bond issuance costs, during the current period. The face
amounts of debt issuances are reported as other financing sources. Issuance costs, whether or not
withheld from the actual net proceeds received, are reported as debt service expenditures.
K) Employee Compensated Absences
City employees may receive from 20 to 30 days vacation time or annual leave each year, depending
upon length of service. An employee may accumulate earned vacation time up to a maximum of
760 hours or annual leave up to a maximum of 784 hours and admin leave up to a maximum of 120
hours, depending on position. The amount of maximum hours for the leave accrual is based on
the employee classification: regular employee, management, department head or City Manager.
Upon termination, employees are paid the full value of their unused annual leave, administrative
leave, vacation time, and a portion of sick leave per management benefits and City's MOU. There
is no fixed payment schedule for employee compensated absences.
L) Property Taxes
The duties of assessing and collecting property taxes are performed by the Ventura County (the
County) Assessor and Tax Collector, respectively. The City receives an allocation of property taxes
collected by the County with respect to property located within the City limits equal to 7.40% of the
one percent State levy. The Agency receives incremental property taxes on property within its
project area over the base- assessed valuation at the date the project area was established. Tax levies
33
147
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
L) Property Taxes - Continued
cover the period from July 1 to June 30 of each year. All tax liens are attached annually on the first
day in January preceding the fiscal year for which the taxes are levied. Taxes are levied on both real
and personal property, as it exists on that date.
Secured property taxes are levied against real property and are due and payable in two equal
installments. The first installment is due on November 1 and becomes delinquent if not paid by
December 10. The second installment is due on February 1 and becomes delinquent if not paid by
April 10. Unsecured personal property taxes are due on July 1 each year. These taxes become
delinquent if not paid by August 31.
M) Claims and Judgments
When it is probable that a claim liability has been incurred, and the amount of the loss can be
reasonably estimated, the City records the estimated loss, net of any insurance coverage under its
self-insurance program. At June 30, 2009, in the opinion of the City Attorney, the City had no
material claims, which require loss provision in the financial statements. Small claims and
judgments are recorded as expenditures when paid.
The City's self-insurance program is administered through the California Joint Powers Insurance
Authority (Authority). The Authority is a public entity risk pool, which is accounted for under the
provisions of GASB Statement No. 10. Claim losses recorded in the Authority include both current
claims and Incurred But Not Reported claims (IBNR). Deposits to the Authority are recorded by
the City as insurance expenditures in the General Fund when paid. These deposits are subject to
retrospective adjustment. Favorable claims experience results in a refund of deposits from the
Authority and such refunds, if any, are recorded as a reduction of insurance expenditures in the year
received. Adverse claims experience results in the payment of additional deposits and such
deposits, if any, are recorded as insurance expenditures when paid.
N) Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those
estmates.
34 148
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
1) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
O) Use of Restricted Resources
When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City's policy to use
restricted resources first, and then unrestricted resources as they are needed.
P) Explanation of Certain Differences Between the Governmental Fund Statement of Revenues,
Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances and the Government -wide Statement of
Activities
The reconciliation states that the issuance of long -term debt provides current financial resources to
governmental funds, while the repayment of the principal of long -term debt consumes the current
financial resources of governmental funds. Neither transaction, however, has any affect on net
assets. Also governmental funds report the affect of issuance costs, premiums, discounts, and
similar items when debt is first issued, whereas these amounts are deferred and amortized in the
statement of activities.
The details of this $478,646 difference is as follows:
Amortization of Issuance Costs
Amortization of Bond Discounts
Principal Repayment
Principal Payment on Pension Related Debt
Net adjustment to increase net change in fund balances -
total governmental funds to arrive at changes in net assets
of governmental activities
$ (16,853)
(10,847)
475,000
31,346
478,646
35
149
{
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
2) CASH AND INVESTMENTS
Cash and investments at June 30, 2009, consisted of the following:
City Treasury Deposits
Demand Deposits
Cash on Hand
Total City Treasury Deposits
City Treasury Investments
Certificates of Deposit
LAIF
Ventura County Pool
U.S. Agency Securities
Total City Treasury Investments
Cash and Investments With Fiscal Agent
Money Markets
Guaranteed Investment Contracts
Total Cash and Investments With Fiscal Agent
Total Cash and Investments
$ 1,453,248
3,250
1,456,498
1,200,000
59,725,094
42,032,593
3,062,813
106,020,500
19,631,708
3,036,722
22,668,430
$130,145,428
Cash and Investments are reported in the basic financial statements as follows:
Statement of
Statement of Fiduciary
Net Assets Net Assets
Governmental
Activities Agency Fund Total
Cash and Investments
$ 104,179,611
$ 3,297,388
$107,476,999
Restricted Cash and Investment
16,160,984
6,507,445
22,668,429
Total
$ 120,340,595
$ 9,804,833
$130,145,428
The City follows the practice of pooling cash and investments of all funds, except for funds required
to be held by fiscal agents under the provisions of bond indentures. Interest income earned on
pooled cash and investments is allocated on a quarterly basis to the various funds based on average
daily cash and investment balances. Interest income from cash and investments with fiscal agents is
credited directly to the related fund.
36 150
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
2) CASH AND INVESTMENTS - Continued
A) Authorized Investments
Investments Authorized by the California Government Code and the City's Investment Policy
The table below identifies the investment types that are authorized for the City by the California
Government Code (or the City's investment policy, where more restrictive). The table also
identifies certain provisions of the California Government Code (or the City's investment policy,
where more restrictive) that address interest rate risk, credit risk, and concentration of credit risk.
This table does not address investments of debt proceeds held by bond trustees that are governed
by provisions of debt agreements of the City, rather than the general provisions of the California
Government or the City's investment policy. As of June 30, 2009, the only debt agreements of
the City pertain to the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency.
*Excluding amounts held by bond trustees that are not subject to California Government Code restrictions.
The Policy, in addition to State statutes, establishes that funds on deposit in banks must be
federally insured or collateralized and investments shall (1) have maximum maturity not to
exceed five years and (2) be laddered and based on cash flow forecasts. The City's investments
comply with the established policy.
37
151
Maximum
Maximum
Authorized
Maximum
Percentage
Investment
Investment Type
Maturity
Of Portfolio*
In One Issuer
U.S. Treasury Obligations
5 years
None
None
U.S. Agency Securities
5 years
None
None
Banker's Acceptances
180 days
40%
30%
Commercial Paper
270 days
25%
10%
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit
5 years
30%
None
Repurchase Agreements
1 year
None
None
Medium -Term Notes
5 years
30%
None
Money Market Mutual Funds
N/A
20%
None
County Pooled Investment Funds
N/A
None
None
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
NIA
None
None
*Excluding amounts held by bond trustees that are not subject to California Government Code restrictions.
The Policy, in addition to State statutes, establishes that funds on deposit in banks must be
federally insured or collateralized and investments shall (1) have maximum maturity not to
exceed five years and (2) be laddered and based on cash flow forecasts. The City's investments
comply with the established policy.
37
151
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
2) CASH AND INVESTMENTS - Continued
A) Authorized Investments - Continued
Investments Authorized by Debt Agreements
Investments of debt proceeds held by bond trustees are governed by provisions of the debt
agreements, rather than the general provisions of the California Government Code or the City's
investment policy. The table below identifies the investment types that are authorized for
investment held by bond trustees.
The table also identifies certain provisions of these debt agreements that address interest rate risk,
credit risk, and concentration of credit risk.
Authorized Investment Type
U.S. Treasury Obligations
U.S. Agency Securities
Banker's Acceptances
Commercial Paper
Money Market Mutual Funds
Investment Contracts
B) Interest Rate Risk
Maximum Maturity
None
None
180 days
270 days
N/A
30 years
Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in market interest rates will adversely affect the fair
value of an investment. Generally, the longer the maturity of an investment, the greater the
sensitivity of its fair value to changes in market interest rates. One of the ways that the City
manages its exposure to interest rate risk is by purchasing a combination of shorter term and
longer term investments and by timing cash flows from maturities so that a portion of the
portfolio is maturing or coming close to maturity evenly over time as necessary to provide the
cash flow and liquidity needed for operations.
Information about the sensitivity of the fair values of the City's investment to market interest rate
fluctuation is provided by the following table that shows the distribution of the City's
investments by maturity.
38 152
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
2) CASH AND INVESTMENTS - Continued
B) Interest Rate Risk - Continued
Investment Type
Local Agency Investment Fund
Ventura County Pool
Certificates of Deposit
FHLM
Held by Bond Trustee:
Money Market Funds
Guaranteed Investment
Contracts 3,036,722
$128,688,930
Total
$ 59,725,094
42,032,593
1,200,000
3,062,813
19,631,708
Total
Investment Maturities (in Years)
Less than 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 >5
$ 59,725,094 $ $ $ $
42,032,593
500,000 700,000
3,062,813
19,631,708
3,036,722
$124,952,208 $ 700,000 $ - $ - $3,036,722
C) Credit Risk and Concentration of Credit Risk
Deposits
At June 30, 2009, the carrying amount of the City's deposits was $1,453,248. Bank balances
before reconciling items were $2,228,630 at June 30, 2009, of which $2,228,630 were
collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial institution's trust department but not
in the City's name.
The California Government Code requires California banks and savings and loan associations to
secure the City's cash deposits by pledging securities as collateral. This Code states that
collateral pledged in this manner shall have the effect of perfecting a security interest in such
collateral superior to those of a general creditor.
According to California law, the market value of pledged securities with banking institutions
must equal at least 110% of the City's cash deposits. California law also allows institutions to
serve City deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the
City's total cash deposits. The City may waive collateral requirements for cash deposits, which
are fully insured up to $250,000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The City,
however, does not normally waive the collateralization requirements.
39
153
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
2) CASH AND INVESTMENTS - Continued
C) Credit Risk and Concentration of Credit Risk - Continued
Investments
Generally, credit risk is the risk that an issuer of an investment will not fulfill its obligation to the
holder of the investment. This is measured by the assignment of rating by a nationally
recognized statistical rating organization. Presented below is the minimum rating required by
(where applicable) the California Government Code and the actual rating as of year end for each
investment type.
The California Government Code places limitations on the amount that can be invested in any
one issuer (as detailed above). Investments in any one issuer (other than U.S. Treasury securities,
mutual funds, and external investment pools) that represent 5% or more of total investments are
as follows:
Credit Quality Distribution for Securities with Credit Exposure as a Percentage of
Total Investments
Investment Type Carrying Value Credit Rating
Percentage of
Investments
Local Agency Investment Fund
$ 59,725,094
Not Rated
46.41%
Ventura County Pool
42,032,593
Not Rated
32.66%
Certificates of Deposit
1,200,000
Not Rated
.93%
FHLM
3,062,813
AAA
2.38%
Held by Bond Trustee:
Money Market Funds
19,631,708
Not Rated
15.26%
Guaranteed Investment Contracts
3,036,722
Not Rated
2.36%
Total
$ 128,688,930
100.00%
The City has no investments in any one issuer that represent 5% or more of total investments as
of June 30, 2009 other than LAIF and the Ventura County Investment Pool.
40 154
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
2) CASH AND INVESTMENTS - Continued
D) Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
The LAIF is a special fund of the California State Treasury through which local governments
may pool investments. Each governmental agency may invest up to $40,000,000 in each account
in the fund. Investments in LAIF are highly liquid, as deposits can be converted to cash within
twenty -four hours without loss of interest or principal. The full faith and credit of the State of
California secures investment in LAIR At June 30, 2009, accounts were maintained in the name
of the City for $40,000,000 and the Redevelopment Agency for $19,725,094. The total cost
value of investment in LAIF was $59,725,094. The total fair value of investments in LAIF was
$59,806,571. The unrealized gain was based on a fair market value adjustment factor of
1.001364207 that was calculated by the State of California Treasurer's Office. At June 30, 2009,
the market value of the State of California Pooled Money Investment Account (PMIA) including
accrued interest was $50,892,735,136. The State of California Pooled Money Account portfolio
had securities in the form of structured notes and asset - backed securities. The PM1A has
policies, goals, and objectives for the portfolio to make certain that the goals of safety, liquidity,
and yield are not jeopardized. These policies are formulated by investment staff and reviewed by
both the PMIA and LAIF Advisory Boards on an annual basis. LAIF's and the City's exposure
to credit, market, or legal risk is not available.
E) The Ventura County Treasurer's Investment Pool
The City holds investments in the County Pool that are subject to being adjusted to "fair value ".
The City is required to disclose its methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of its
holdings in the County Pool. The City relied upon information provided by the County Treasurer
in estimating the City's fair value position of its holdings in the County Pool. The City had a
contractual withdrawal value of $42,032,593 at fiscal year end.
The Ventura County Treasurer's Investment Pool is a governmental investment pool managed
and directed by the elected Ventura County Treasurer. The County Pool is not registered with
the Securities and Exchange Commission. An oversight committee comprised of local
government officials and various participants provide oversight to the management of the fund.
The daily operations and responsibilities of the Pool fall under the auspices of the County
Treasurer's office. The City is a voluntary participant in the investment pool.
41
155
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
3) NOTES AND LOANS RECEIVABLE
Notes and loans receivable activity for the year ended June 30, 2009, is as follows:
Notes Receivable:
Asadurian
Mission Bell
Deferred Property Assessments
Total Notes Receivable
Loans Receivable:
Rehabilitation
First -time Homeowners Assistance
CalHome
Other
Total Loans Receivable
Total Notes and Loans Receivable
A) Asadurian Note
Beginning
Balance Increases Decreases
Ending
Balance
$ 960,000 $ $ (160,000) $ 800,000
1,704,786 1,704,786
250,249 250,249
2,915,035
(160,000) 2,755,035
31,384 31,384
111,556 100,000 211,556
306,036 75,147 381,183
125,514 125,514
448,976 300,661 - 749,637
$ 3,364,011 $ 300,661 $ (160,000) $ 3,504,672
On April 7, 2003, the City entered into an agreement with Asadurian Investment Corporation
whereby in return for land disposition, the City received a $1,200,000 promissory note. The note
bears simple interest at the rate equal to the average monthly interest rate announced by the Local
Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). The borrower shall pay the City the amount of $80,000 plus
interest over fifteen years. The balance outstanding at June 30, 2009 was $800,000.
B) Mission Bell Note
On August 2, 1995, the Agency entered into an agreement with Mission Bell Partners whereby in
return for land disposition, the Agency received seven promissory notes totaling $3,934,500. The
notes bear simple interest from a rate of 3% to a rate of 6% per annum from August 29, 1995 until
August 29, 2029. In June 2004 the Agency, per settlement agreement discharged three of the
remaining six of the original seven promissory notes totaling $500,000. In September of 2006,
notes number 2 and 6 were paid off. The balance of the remaining note (note no. 7) outstanding at
June 30, 2009 was $1,704,786. Principal and interest are due on September 2, 2029.
42 156
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
3) NOTES AND LOANS RECEIVABLE - Continued
C) Deferred Property Assessments Notes
In March 1993, the City entered into agreements with three property owners of the City of
Moorpark Assessment District No. 92 -1 whereby in return for deferring the property owner's
assessment levy, the City received three promissory notes totaling $279,427. The notes bear simple
interest equivalent to the LAIF variable rate not to exceed 7% per annum. Principal and interest are
due on the date the City executes an approved final map of the property or the date of a court
ordered subdivide of the property. At June 30, 2009, the principal balance outstanding was
$250,249.
D) Rehabilatation Loans
The Agency operates a rehabilitation loan program for the renovation of low- moderate income
housing. The total balance outstanding at June 30, 2009, was $31,384.
E) First -Time Homeowner Assistance
The City provides down payment assistance loans to first -time homeowners. The total balance
outstanding at June 30, 2009 was $211,556. In order to reinforce the resale restrictions on properties
purchased through the City's First Time Home Buyer Program, buyers execute Promissory Notes
and Deeds of Trust are recorded to secure these Notes. The Notes become payable only in the event
of a default of any provision of this program.
F) CalHome Mobilehome Rehabilitation Loans
The total balance of CalHome loans for repairs to mobilehomes in Villa del Arroyo at June 30,
2009 was $381,183. These loans are subject to a conditional forgiveness provision, beginning in
Year 6 of the loan, continuing through Year 10 of the loan, with 20% of the balance forgiven each
of these years; $90,657 has been received and $2,597 has been forgiven. Funds received are
deposited into a City Trust Fund to be used for eligible home ownership - related activities.
43 157
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
3) NOTES AND LOANS RECEIVABLE - Continued
G) Other Loans Receivable
The Agency has entered into an agreement to loan the County of Ventura Area Housing Authority
(AHA) up to $350,000 to assist in developing residential rental units on Agency owned property.
As of June 30, 2009, the AHA has drawn down $125,514 on the available loan. The outstanding
principal balance and interest are expected to be paid during fiscal year 2009/10.
4) INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS
Due to/Due From
Due to /due from other funds for the year ending June 30, 2009, consisted of the following:
DUE TO
The RDA Capital Projects and Low/Moderate Funds have advanced to the RDA Debt Service Fund
$41,245 to cover current expenditures. Repayment is expected during fiscal year 2009/10.
The Endowment Fund has advanced to the Police Facilities Fee Fund $1,943,495 to fund Capital
Improvements. The advance is expected to be repaid with development fees to be collected in the
future.
44 158
MRA RDA Capital
General Endowment Area 1 Projects Non -Major
Agency
Fund Fund Operations Fund Funds
Funds
Total
General Fund $
$ $ 54,577 $ $
$ 21,532 $
76,109
Police Facilities Fund
52,173 1,943,495
1,995,668
DUE
RDA Capital Projects Fund
17,286
17,286
FROM
MRA Area 1 Operations
60,301 60,000
120,301
Non -Major Funds
259,588 350,000 134,242
743,830
Total $
389,348 $ 1,943,495 $ 54,577 $ 350,000 $ 194,242
$ 21,532 $
2,953,194
The General Fund has advanced to the Agency and the State and Federal Assistance Fund $316,868 to
cover current expenditures.
Repayment is expected during fiscal year 2009/10.
The RDA Capital Projects and Low/Moderate Funds have advanced to the RDA Debt Service Fund
$41,245 to cover current expenditures. Repayment is expected during fiscal year 2009/10.
The Endowment Fund has advanced to the Police Facilities Fee Fund $1,943,495 to fund Capital
Improvements. The advance is expected to be repaid with development fees to be collected in the
future.
44 158
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
4) INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS - Continued
Transfers
Interfund transfers for the year ended June 30, 2009 consisted of the following:
TRANSFERS FROM
TRANSFER
TO
TRANSFER
TRANSFERS FROM
RDA MRA
Debt Area 1 Non -Major
Service Operations Funds Total
General Fund $ $ 20,085 $ 405,616 $ 464,718
RDA Debt Service 152,117 152,117
RDA Capital Projects
Special Projects Fund 1,969,504
TO Community Development 5,245 11,371 1,162,972
Assessment District 162,444 1,357,750
MRA Area 1 Operations 931,193 5,777,516
Non -Major Funds 1,584,573 22,943 1,184,574 6,178,073
Total $ 2,515,766 $ 48,273 $ 1,916,122 $17,062,650
Transfers are used to (1) move revenues from the fund that statute or budget requires to collect them to
the fund that statute or budget requires to expend them and (2) use unrestricted revenues collected in
the General Fund to finance various programs accounted for in other funds in accordance with
budgetary authorizations or grant matching requirements.
45 159
RDA
General
Street and
Capital
Assessment
Endowment
Fund
Traffic Safety
Project
District
Fund
General Fund
$
$ 29,017
$
$ 10,000
$
RDA Debt Service
RDA Capital Projects
Special Projects Fund
1,969,504
Community Development
1,146,356
Assessment District
1,195,306
MRA Area 1 Operations
4,846,323
Non -Major Funds
17,286
3,368,697
Total
$ 4,311,166
$ 29,017
$ 4,863,609
$ 10,000
$ 3,368,697
TRANSFERS FROM
RDA MRA
Debt Area 1 Non -Major
Service Operations Funds Total
General Fund $ $ 20,085 $ 405,616 $ 464,718
RDA Debt Service 152,117 152,117
RDA Capital Projects
Special Projects Fund 1,969,504
TO Community Development 5,245 11,371 1,162,972
Assessment District 162,444 1,357,750
MRA Area 1 Operations 931,193 5,777,516
Non -Major Funds 1,584,573 22,943 1,184,574 6,178,073
Total $ 2,515,766 $ 48,273 $ 1,916,122 $17,062,650
Transfers are used to (1) move revenues from the fund that statute or budget requires to collect them to
the fund that statute or budget requires to expend them and (2) use unrestricted revenues collected in
the General Fund to finance various programs accounted for in other funds in accordance with
budgetary authorizations or grant matching requirements.
45 159
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
4) INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS - Continued
The RDA Debt Service Fund transferred funds to the Low /Mod Housing Special Revenue Fund to
meet the low and moderate income housing 20% tax increment set -aside requirement.
The RDA Debt Service Fund transferred its remaining equity to the MRA Area 1 Operations Fund
The RDA Capital Projects Fund transferred funds to the MRA Area 1 Operations Fund to reimburse for
eligible capital expenditures.
The Low/Mod Housing Special Revenue Fund transferred funds to the RDA Debt Service Fund to pay
the 20% debt service on the 1999 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds
The General Fund transferred $1,969,504 to the Special Projects Fund to fund various capital projects
of the City.
The Endowment Fund transferred funds to the City Hall Building Fund to plan and construct a New
City Hall complex.
The General Fund transferred funds to the Community Development and Assessment District Funds to
finance these operations.
5) CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION
In accordance with GASB Statement No. 34, the City has reported all capital assets including
infrastructure in the Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets. The City elected to use the basic
approach as defined by GASB Statement No. 34 for all infrastructure reporting, whereby depreciation
expense and accumulated depreciation have been recorded.
46 160
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
5) CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION - Continued
The following table presents the capital assets activity for the year ended June 30, 2009.
Governmental Activities:
Capital Assets, Not Depreciated:
Land
Construction in Progress
Total Capital Assets Not
Depreciated
Capital Assets Being Depreciated:
Buildings and Improvements
Machinery and Equipment
Infrastructure
Roadway System
Storm Drainage System
Parks System
Total Capital Assets Being
Depreciated
Less Accumulated Depreciation:
Buildings and Improvements
Machinery and Equipment
Infrastructure
Roadway System
Storm Drainage System
Parks System
Total Accumulated Depreciation
Total Capital Assets Being
Depreciated, Net
Government Activities Capital Assets,
Net of Depreciation
Beginning
(820,238)
(5,103,588)
Ending
Balance
Increases
Decreases
Balance
(30,733,907)
(168,502)
(16,194)
(184,696)
$ 26,417,883
$
$ $
28,719,337
9,970,434
3,539,706
(3,606,952)
9,903,188
38,689,771.
3,539,706
(3,606,952)
38,622,525
27,926,738
2,570,523
30,497,261
4,389,381
201,857
(79,465)
4,511,773
92,706,368
990,139
(13,010)
93,683,497
1,619,399
1,619,399
156,727
94,107
251,434
126,798,613 3,857,226 (92,475) 130,563,364
(4,283,350)
(820,238)
(5,103,588)
(2,169,871)
(434,254)
74,595 (2,529,530)
(28,746,966)
(1,986,941)
(30,733,907)
(168,502)
(16,194)
(184,696)
(48,587)
(4,082)
(52,669)
(35,417,276) (3,261,709) 74,595 (38,604,390)
91,381,337 595,517 (17,880) 91,958,974
$ 130,071,108 $ 4,135,223 $ (3,624,832) $ 130,581,499
Depreciation expense was charged to functions /programs of the primary government as follows:
Governmental Activities:
General Government
Public Safety
Public Services
Parks and Recreation
Total Depreciation Expense
$ 136,314
230,129
2,601,940
293,326
$ 3,261,709
47 161
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
6) LONGTERM LIABILITIES
Long -term liability activities for the year ended June 30, 2009, are as follows:
1999 Tax Allocation Bonds
2001 Tax Allocation Bonds
2006 Tax Allocation Bonds
Discount on Bonds
Pension Related Debt
Employee Compensated
Absences
Total
Beginning
Ending
Due Within
Balance Additions
Deletions
Balance
One Year
$ 6,430,000 $
$ (460,000)
$ 5,970,000
$ 475,000
11,555,000
(15,000)
11,540,000
20,000
11,695,000
11,695,000
(309,131)
10,847
(298,284)
(10,847)
1,388,702
(31,346)
1,357,356
665,389 673,408
(696,541)
642,256
479,936
$31,424,960 $ 673,408 $ (1,192,040) $30,906,328 $ 964,089
A) 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds
In 1999, the Agency issued a $9,860,000 aggregated principal amount of Moorpark Redevelopment
Project 1999 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds (1999 Bonds). The purpose of the 1999 Bonds was
to advance refund the Agency's previously issued $10,000,000 Moorpark Redevelopment Project,
1993 Tax Allocation Bonds (1993 Bonds). The purpose of the 1993 Bonds was to finance a portion
of the costs of implementing the Redevelopment Plan, including low -and moderate - income housing
projects. The 1999 Bonds bear interest at rates ranging from 3.05 percent to 4.875 percent per
annum, payable semi - annually on April 1 and October 1 of each year, commencing on October 1,
1999, and are subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption commencing on October 1, 2009, and
on each October 1 thereafter. The Bonds are payable from and secured by the tax revenues to be
derived from the project area.
The 1999 Bonds are secured by all property tax increment revenue, which is deposited directly with
the fiscal agent and recorded in the Debt Service Fund. Cash and investments in the custody of the
fiscal agent are restricted by the bond resolutions for payment of principal and interest on the Tax
Allocation Bonds. In addition, the bond resolutions require retention of funds held by the fiscal
agent prior to use for other than debt service.
The Agency is in compliance with the covenants contained in debt indenture, which require the
establishment of certain specific accounts for the Tax Allocation Bonds.
Debt service payments on the 1999 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds payable will be made from
the Debt Service Fund. Annual debt service requirements to maturity are as follows:
48 162
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
6) LONG -TERM LIABILITIES - Continued
A) 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds - Continued
Year Ending
June 30,
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015 -2019
Total
B) 2001 Tax Allocation Bonds
Tax Allocation Bonds
Principal
Interest
$ 475,000
$ 279,459
500,000
255,694
525,000
230,709
550,000
204,506
580,000
176,962
3,340,000
422,905
Total
$ 754,459
755,694
755,709
754,506
756,962
3,762,905
$ 5,970,000 $ 1,570,235 $ 7,540,235
In December 2001, the Agency issued $11,625,000 of Tax Allocation Parity Bonds (2001 Bonds).
The proceeds of the 2001 Bonds will be used to fund redevelopment activities within the Moorpark
Redevelopment Project area. Interest on the 2001 Bonds is payable semi- annually on April 1 and
October 1, commencing April 1, 2002, at rates ranging from 2.85 percent to 5.13 percent per
annum. The 2001 Bonds maturing October 2031 are subject to mandatory sinking funds
redemption in the amount of the principal and accrued interest. The 2001 Bonds are payable from
and secured by the tax revenues to be derived from the project area.
The 2001 Bonds are secured by all property tax increment revenue, which is deposited directly with
the fiscal agent and recorded in the Debt Service Fund. Cash and investments in the custody of the
fiscal agent are restricted by the bond resolutions for payment of principal and interest on the Tax
Allocation Bonds. In addition, the bond resolutions require retention of funds held by the fiscal
agent prior to use for other than debt service.
The Agency is in compliance with the covenants contained in debt indentures, which require the
establishment of certain specific accounts for the Tax Allocations Bonds.
Debt service payments on the 2001 Tax Allocation Bonds payable will be made from the Debt
Service Fund.
49 163
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
6) LONGTERM LIABILITIES - Continued
B) 2001 Tax Allocation Bonds - Continued
Annual debt service requirements to maturity are as follows:
Year Ending
June 30,
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015 -2019
2020 -2024
2025 -2029
2030-2032
Total
C) 2006 Tax Allocation Bonds
Tax Allocation
Bonds
Principal
Interest
Total
$ 20,000 $
588,469
$ 608,469
15,000
587,743
602,743
15,000
587,098
602,098
20,000
586,319
606,319
15,000
585,525
600,525
100,000
2,913,875
3,013,875
3,530,000
2,473,206
6,003,206
4,520,000
1,449,095
5,969,095
3,305,000
259,454
3,564,454
$ 11,540,000 $ 10,030,784 $ 21,570,784
In 2006, the Agency issued an $11,695,000 aggregated principal amount of Moorpark
Redevelopment Project 2006 Tax Allocation Bonds (2006 Bonds). The purpose of the 2006 Bonds
was to finance redevelopment activities relaxed to the Moorpark Redevelopment Project Area. The
2006 Bonds bear interest at rates ranging from 3.625 percent to 4.375 percent per annum, payable
semi - annually on April 1 and October 1 of each year, commencing on April 1, 2007, and are subject
to mandatory sinking fund redemption commencing on October 1, 2016, and on each October 1
thereafter. The 2006 Bonds are payable from and secured by the tax revenues to be derived from
the project area.
The 2006 Bonds are secured by all property tax increment revenue, which is recorded in the Debt
Service Fund. Cash and investments in the custody of the fiscal agent are restricted by the bond
resolutions for payment of principal and interest on the Tax Allocation Bonds.
The Agency is in compliance with the covenants contained in the debt indenture, which require
the establishment of certain specific accounts for the Tax Allocation Bonds.
50 164
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
6) LONG -TERM LIABILITIES -Continued
C) 2006 Tax Allocation Bonds - Continued
Debt service payments on the 2006 Tax Allocation Bonds payable will be made from the Debt
Service Fund. Annual debt service requirements to maturity are as follows:
Year Ending
June 30,
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015 -2019
2020 -2024
2025 -2029
2030 -3034
2035 -2039
Total
D) Pension - Related Debt
Tax Allocation Bonds
Principal
40,000
40,000
35,000
40,000
225,000
280,000
345,000
2,920,000
7,770,000
$ 11,695,000
Interest Total
$ 508,163
507,437
505,987
504,628
503,269
2,492,706
2,443,069
2,376,884
2,185,313
878,937
$ 12,906,393
$ 508,163
547,437
545,987
539,628
543,269
2,717,706
2,723,069
2,721,884
5,105,313
8,648,937
$ 24,601,393
As of June 30, 2003, CalPERS implemented risk pooling for the City's multiple - employer public
employee defined benefit pension plan. At that point, in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, the City's Miscellaneous Plan converted from an "agent" multiple- employer
plan to a "cost- sharing" multiple - employer plan. Although a portion of the City's annual required
contributions are actuarially determined and shared by all employers of the risk pool, the City is
also required to make annual payments on a "Side Fund" which was created when the City entered
the risk pool. The responsibility for funding the Side Fund is specific to the City and is not shared
by all employers in the plan. Therefore, the Side Fund falls under the definition of pension - related
debt, as described in GASR Statement No. 27. The annual payments on the Side Fund represent
principal and interest payments on the pension - related debt. Principal and interest are included in
the retirement expenditures in the various functions.
51 165
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
) LONG -TERM LIABILITIES -Continued
D) Pension- Related Debt - Continued
The future debt service requirements on this debt are as follows:
Year Ending
June 30,
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Total
Pension - related Debt
Principal Interest
Total
$ 38,292
$ 99,939
$ 138,231
45,923
96,800
142,723
54,297
93,065
147,362
63,476
88,675
152,151
73,528
83,567
157,095
84,527
77,675
162,202
96,549
70,923
167,472
109,682
63,234
172,916
124,016
54,520
178,536
139,650
44,688
184,338
156,692
33,637
190,329
175,256
21,258
196,514
195,468
7,433
202,901
$ 1,357,356 $ 835,414 $ 2,192,770
E) Employee Compensated Absences
The long -term liability at June 30, 2009 is $642,256 for employee compensated absences. There is
no current liability estimated. The General Fund is primarily expected to liquidate this liability.
7) AGREEMENTS WITH VARIOUS TAXING AGENCIES
The Agency has entered into five (5) agreements for allocation and distribution of tax increment
revenues:
The first agreement is with the County of Ventura, Ventura County Library District, Ventura County
Fire Protection District, and Ventura. County Flood Control District (collectively, the "County Taxing
Entities "), which provides for the Agency to retain 100 percent of the County Taxing Entities share
(55.82 percent) of annual tax increment revenues up to $1,750,000. For annual tax increment revenue
in excess of $1,750,000, the Agency shall distribute 55.82 percent of such revenues to the County on
behalf of the County Taxing Entities. The County Taxing Entities have agreed to defer payments in the
52 166
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
7) AGREEMENTS WITH VARIOUS TAXING AGENCIES - Continued
initial years of the Redevelopment Plan, and consequently, the parties agree that the County Taxing
Entities may receive payments in any single fiscal year in excess of the amount of tax revenues the
County Taxing Entities would otherwise be entitled to, but for the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan.
Additionally, the agreement calls for the Agency to 'receive a $1,000,000 payment from the tax
increment disbursed to the County pursuant to the agreement, by December 31, 2008, if and only if the
Agency's annual debt statements which are filed with the County Auditor - Controller from fiscal year
1993/94 to fiscal year 2008/09 list debts in an amount equal to or in excess of the maximum tax
increment available to the Agency in each of such fiscal years. (Also, see Note 16)
With respect to the first paragraph, 4.2 percent of the County Taxing Entities share is allocated to the
County Library District (aka County Free Library System). The City of Moorpark has withdrawn from
the County Free Library System and now operates the Moorpark Library. Pursuant to the
Memorandum of Understanding governing the County Free Library System, upon withdrawal, a city is
entitled to all property taxes allocated to library purposes from within the corporate boundaries of such
city. The County has agreed that the City of Moorpark is entitled to the share of annual tax increment
previously allocated to the County Library District under the first agreement.
The second agreement is with the City of Moorpark Vector Control, formerly known as the Moorpark
Mosquito Abatement District and states that the City of Moorpark Vector Control shall receive 87.5
percent of its share (1.53 percent) of annual tax increment revenue, following a deduction from total
increment revenues for amounts required to be used for housing purposes (currently 20 percent of total
tax increment revenue).
The third agreement is with the Moorpark Unified School District (the School District), and states that
the School District shall receive, after the Agency has satisfied debt service payments to bond or note
holders or to the holder of any other instruments of Agency indebtedness (provided such indebtedness
is not reasonably foreseeable to impair the Agency's obligation under the agreement), the School
District's share (33.41 percent) of tax increment revenues generated by an annual 2 percent increase in
assessed valuation, and beginning in fiscal year 1995/96, 14 percent of the School District's share of
annual tax increment revenue.
53
167
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
7) AGREEMENTS WITH VARIOUS TAXING AGENCIES - Continued
Per the agreement between the School District and the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, the
distributions to the School District shall be expended for the following purposes at school sites in the
incorporated boundaries of the City:
1. Telephone systems for new buildings
2. Computer hardware and educational systems
3. Land acquisition
4. Books
5. School buildings and facilities and related capital improvements and modernization projects
(collectively public works); such public works may include design, inspection and
administration. costs, but not School District overhead or salary/benefits for regular School
District employees.
The Agency may pre- approve other expenditures that are submitted in writing by the School District.
The fourth agreement is with the Ventura County Community College District (the Community College
District), and states that the Community College District will receive, after the Agency has satisfied
debt service payments to bond or note holders or to the holders of any other instruments of Agency
indebtedness (provided . such indebtedness is not reasonably foreseeable to impair the Agency's
obligation under the agreement), the Community College District's share (5.81 percent) of tax
increment revenues generated by an annual 2 percent increase in assessed valuation, and beginning in
fiscal year 1993/94, 14 percent of the Community College District's share of annual tax increment
revenue.
An agreement, dated May 1, 2008, between the City and the Community College District redirects
the Community College District's tax increment allocation. The Agency shall transfer to the City the
Community College District's tax increment allocations, up to One Million Dollars ($1,000,000),
beginning with fiscal year 2006 /07 and for every fiscal year thereafter through and including the
2024/25 fiscal year for the purpose of constructing certain public improvements near Moorpark
College.
The fifth agreement is with the Ventura County Superintendent of Schools Office (the Superintendent),
and states that the Superintendent shall receive its share (2.49 percent) of tax increment revenues
generated by an annual 2 percent increase in assessed valuation.
54 168
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
8) RETIREMENT PLAN
A) Plan Description
The City of Moorpark contributes to the California Public Employees Retirement System
(Ca1PERS), a cost - sharing multiple- employer public employee defined benefit pension plan.
CalPERS provides retirement and disability benefits, annual cost -of -living adjustments, and death
benefits to plan members and beneficiaries. CalPERS acts as a common investment and
administrative agent for participating public entities within the State of California. Benefit
provisions and all other requirements are established by state statute and city ordinance. Copies of
CalPERS' annual financial report may be obtained from their executive office: 400 P Street,
Sacramento, California 95814.
B) Funding Policy
Active plan members are required to contribute 7 percent of their covered salary. The City of
Moorpark makes the contribution required of the City employees on their behalf. The City is also
required to make an additional contribution at an actuarially determined rate. The required
employer contribution rate for the fiscal year 2008/09 was 11.607 percent. The contribution
requirements for plan members are established by State statute and the employer contribution rate is
established and may be amended by CalPERS. The following represents the required contributions
for the past three fiscal years:
Fiscal Required Percent
Year Contributions Contributed
2006/07 $ 455,376 100%
2007/08 $ 448,187 100%
2008/09 $ 491,357 100%
9) OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
Plan Description
The City's defined benefit postemployment healthcare plan, (City of Moorpark Retiree Healthcare Plan,
MRHP), provides medical benefits to eligible retired City employees and spouses. MRHP is part of the
Public Agency portion of the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust Fund (CERBT), an agent
multiple- employer plan administered by CalPERS, which acts as a common investment and
administrative agent for participating public employers within the State of California. A menu of
benefit provisions as well as other requirements is established by State statute within the Public
55 169
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
9) OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS - Continued
Plan Description - Continued
Employees' Retirement Law. MRIHP selects optional benefit provisions from the benefit menu by
contract with CalPERS and adopts those benefits through City resolution. CaIPERS issues a
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The CAFR is issued in aggregate and includes the
sum of all CalPERS plans. Copies of the CaIPERS CAFR may be obtained from the CaIPER.S
Executive Office, 400 P Street, Sacramento, California 95814.
Funding Policy
The contribution requirements of plan members and the City are established and may be amended by
the Council. The City contributes the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act
(PEMHCA) minimum.
The City is required to contribute the annual required contribution of the employer (ARC), an
amount actuarially determined in accordance with the parameters of GASB Statement 45. The ARC
represents a level of funding that, if paid on an ongoing basis, is projected to cover the normal cost
each year and amortize any unfunded actuarial liabilities (or funding excess) over a period not to
exceed thirty years. The current ARC rate is 1.2% of the annual covered payroll.
Annual OPEB Cost
For 2009, the City's annual OPEB cost (expense) of $54,000 for MRHP was equal to the ARC. The
City's annual OPEB cost, the percentage of annual OPEB cost contributed to the plan, and the net
OPEB obligation for 2009 and the two preceding years were as follows:
THREE -YEAR TREND INFORMATION FOR CERBT
Percentage of
Fiscal Annual OPEB OPEB Cost Net OPEB
Year Cost (AOC) Contributed Obligation
6/30/09 $ 54,000 100% (341,000) #
6/30/08
6/30/07
# The City of Moorpark pre - funded the Actuarial Accrued Liability of $364,000 plus the normal cost of $31,000
during the 2008/09 fiscal year ending June 30, 2009.
* The information for the two preceding years is unavailable. GASB 45 was implemented prospectively in fiscal
year 2008/09.
56 170
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
9) OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS - Continued
Funded Status and Funding Progress
The funded status of the plan as of June 30, 2008, was as follows:
Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL) $ 364,000
Actuarial Value of Plan Assets $ 0
Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) $ 364,000
Funded Ratio (Actuarial Value of Plan Assets /AAL) 0%
Covered Payroll (Active Plan Members) $ 4,519,000
UAAL as a Percentage of Covered Payroll 8.055%
Actuarial valuations of an ongoing plan involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and
assumptions about the probability of occurrence of events far into the future. Examples include
assumptions about future employment, mortality, and the healthcare cost trend. Amounts determined
regarding the funded status of the plan and the annual required contributions of the employer are
subject to continual revision as actual results are compared with past expectations and new estimates
are made about the future. The schedule of funding progress, presented as required supplementary
information following the notes to the financial statements, presents multiyear trend information that
shows whether the actuarial value of the plan assets is increasing or decreasing over time relative to
the actuarial accrued liabilities for benefits.
Actuarial Methods and Assumptions
Projections of benefits for financial reporting purposes are based on the substantive plan (the plan as
understood by the employer and plan members) and include the types of benefits provided at the time
of each valuation and the historical pattern of sharing of benefit costs between the employer and plan
members to that point. The actuarial methods and assumptions used include techniques that are
designed to reduce short-term volatility in actuarial accrued liabilities and the actuarial value of
assets, consistent with the long -term perspective of the calculations.
The following is a summary of the actuarial assumptions and methods:
Valuation Date
Actuarial Cost Method
Amortization Method
Remaining Amortization Period
Actuarial Assumptions:
Investment Rate of Return
Projected Salary Increase
Health Care Trend Rate
General Inflation
June 30, 2008
Entry Age Normal Cost Method
Level Percent of Payroll
30 Years as of the Valuation Date
7.75%
3.25%
4.50%
3.00%
61d
171
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
10) CONDUIT DEBT - REVENUE BONDS
The City of Moorpark Mobile Home Park Revenue Bonds (Villa Del Arroyo) Series 2000 A and the
City of Moorpark Mobile Home Park Subordinate Revenue Bonds (Villa Del Arroyo) Series 2000 B
were issued in the amounts of $12,740,000 and $2,635,000 respectively. Both issuances were dated
May 19, 2000. The Series A bonds were issued to fund a loan to Augusta Homes, a California non-
profit public benefit corporation, to finance the acquisition of the Villa Del Arroyo Mobile Home Park.
The Series B bonds were issued for the same purpose but are subordinate to the Series A bonds. The
total bonds outstanding at June 30, 2009, totaled $13,330,000.
The City of Moorpark Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Vintage Crest Senior Apartment Project)
2002 Series A were issued in the amount of $16,000,000. The issuance was dated December 1, 2002.
The Series A Bonds were issued to fund a loan to Vintage Crest Senior Apartment L.P., a California
Limited Partnership, to finance the Vintage Crest Senior Housing Project. The bonds outstanding at
June 30, 2009, totaled $15,107,172.
Each of the bond programs described above do not constitute an indebtedness of the City, and there is
neither a legal nor a moral obligation on the part of the City to make payments on such bonds from any
source other than the revenues and assets pledged therefore. The programs are completely administered
by the Trustees without any involvement by the City. Accordingly, these programs and the bonds
issued thereunder have been excluded from the accompanying basic financial statements.
11) SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS
A) Assessment District 92-1 (Mission Bell Plaza)
On April 1, 1994, the City sponsored the issuance of special assessment bonds to finance certain
capital improvements for the Mission Bell Plaza. project. These bonds, totaling $2,595,000, of
which $735,000 and $1,475,000 mature in 2013 and 2023, respectively, were issued under the 1915
Improvements Bonds Act and are obligations against the properties in the assessment district. The
special assessment, which is collected with other property related taxes as part of the secured
property tax bill for properties in the assessment district, will be forwarded to an independent bank
that serves as the paying agent. These bonds do not constitute an indebtedness of the City, and the
City is not liable for their repayment. Accordingly, these special assessment bonds payable have
been excluded from the accompanying basic financial statements. The unpaid principal balance on
such bonds is $1,525,000 at June 30, 2009.
58 172
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
11) SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS - Continued
B) Community Facilities District No. 97- 1(CARLSBERG)
On July 1, 1997, the City issued bonds to finance the acquisition and construction of public
improvements within the City of Moorpark Community Facilities District No. 97 -1. These bonds,
totaling $7,645,000, were issued pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982.
The bonds mature on September 1, 2027 with interest payable at rates ranging from 4.4 percent to 6
percent per annum on March 1, and September 1 of each year commencing March 1, 1998. The
City is not liable under any circumstance for the repayment of the debt, but is only acting as agent
for the property owners in collecting the assessments and special taxes, forwarding collections to
fiscal agents to pay the bondholders and initiating foreclosure proceedings, if appropriate.
Accordingly, these bonds payable have been excluded from the accompanying basic financial
statements. The unpaid principal balance is $6,310,000 at June 30, 2009.
C) Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 (Moorpark Highlands)
During fiscal year 2006 /07, the City issued bonds to construct and acquire certain public facilities
of benefit to the Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1. The bonds, totaling $38,030,000,
were issued pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. The bonds mature
on September 1, 2038 with interest payable at rates ranging from 4.0 percent to 5.3 percent per
annum, on March 1 and September 1 of each year. The City is not liable under any circumstance
for the repayment of the debt, but is only acting as agent for the property owners in collecting the
assessments and special taxes, forwarding collections to fiscal agents to pay the bondholders and
initiating foreclosure proceedings, if appropriate. Accordingly, these bonds payable have been
excluded from the accompanying basic financial statements. The unpaid principal balance is
$35,435,000 at June 30, 2009.
12) RISK MANAGEMENT
A) Description of Self - Insurance Pool Pursuant to Joint Powers Agreement
The City is a member of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (Authority). The .
Authority is composed of over 100 California public entities and is organized under a joint powers
agreement pursuant to California Government Code 6500 -et seq. The purpose of the Authority is to
arrange and administer programs for the pooling of self-insured losses, to purchase excess insurance
or reinsurance, and to arrange for group - purchased insurance for property and other coverages. The
Authority's pool began covering claims of its members in 1978. Each member government has an
elected official as its representative on the Board of Directors. The Board operates through a nine-
member Executive Committee.
59 173
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
12) RISK MANAGEMENT - Continued
A) Description of Self- Insurance Pool Pursuant to Joint Powers Agreement - Continued
The City does not have an equity interest in the Authority: therefore, no amount has been reported
in the Statement of Net Assets. However, the City does have an ongoing financial interest because
the City is able to influence the operations of the Authority so that the Authority uses its resources
on behalf of the City. Also, an ongoing financial responsibility exists because the Authority is
dependent on continued funding from the City. The condensed financial information of the
Authority has not been reproduced in this report, but is available from the Authority.
B) Self Insurance Programs of the Authority
General Liability: Each member government pays a primary deposit to cover estimated losses for a
fiscal year (claims year). Six months after the close of a fiscal year, outstanding claims are valued.
A retrospective deposit computation is then made for each open claims year. Costs are spread to
members as follows: the first $30,000 of each occurrence is charged directly to the member; costs
from $30,001 to $750,000 are pooled based on a member's share of costs under $30,000; costs
from $50,001 to $5,000,000 are pooled based on payroll. Cost of covered claims above $5,000,000
are currently paid by reinsurance. The Protection for each member is $50,000,000 per occurrence
and $50,000,000 annual aggregate.
Workers' Compensation: The City also participates in the workers compensation pool
administered by the Authority. Members retain the first $50,000 of each claim. Claims are pooled
separately between public safety and non -public safety. Loss development reserves are allocated by
pool and by loss layer ($0 to $100,000 allocated by retained amount and $100,000 to $2,000,000 by
payroll). Losses from $50,000 to $100,000 and the loss development reserve associated with losses
up to $100,000 are pooled based on the member's share of losses under $50,000. Losses from
$100,000 to $2,000,000 are pooled based on payroll. Costs in excess of $50,000,000 are pooled
among the Members based on payroll. Administrative expenses are paid from the Authority's
investment earnings.
C) Purchased Insurance
The City participates in the all -risk property protection program of the Authority. This insurance
protection is underwritten by several insurance companies. The City property is currently insured
according to a schedule of covered property submitted by the City to the Authority. Total all -risk
property insurance coverage is $25,067,394. There is a $5,000 per loss deductible. Premiums
for the coverage are paid annually and are not subject to retroactive adjustments.
60 174
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
12) RISK MANAGEMENT - Continued
D) Earthquake and Flood Insurance
The City purchased earthquake and flood insurance on a portion of its property. The earthquake
insurance is part of the property protection insurance program of the Authority. The City property
currently has earthquake protection in the amount of $20,504,842. There is a deductible of 5
percent of the value with a minimum deduction of $100,000. Premiums for the coverage are paid
annually and are not subject to retroactive adjustments.
E) Adequacy of Protection
During the past three fiscal (claims) years none of the above program of protection have had
settlements or judgments that exceeded pooled or insured coverage. There have been no significant
reductions in pooled or insured liability coverage from coverage in the prior year.
F) Claims and Judgments
The City accounts for uninsured, material claims and judgments and associated legal and
administrative costs when it is probable that the liability claim has been incurred and the amount
of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Included therein are claims incurred but not reported,
which consists of (a) known loss events expected to be presented as claims later, (b) unknown
loss events that are expected to become claims, and (c) expected future development on claims
already reported. This is based upon historical actual results that have established a reliable pattern
supplemented by specific information about current matters. Small dollar claims and judgments are
recorded as expenditures when paid.
13) CLASSIFICATION OF NET ASSETS AND FUND BALANCE
In the Government -wide financial statements; net assets are classified in the following categories:
Invested in Capital Assets
This category groups all assets, including infrastructure, into one component of net assets.
Accumulated depreciation on these assets reduces this category.
Restricted Net Assets
This category presents external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors, or laws and
regulations of other governments and restrictions imposed by law through constitutional provisions or
enabling legislation.
61 175
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
13) CLASSIFICATION OF NET ASSETS AND FUND BALANCE - Continued
Unrestricted Net Assets
This. category represents the net assets of the City that are not externally restricted for any project or
other purpose.
In the Fund Financial Statements, the City has established "reserves" to segregate portions of fund
balance which are not appropriable for expenditure in future periods, or which are legally set aside for a
specific future use. Fund "designations" also are established to indicate tentative plans for financial
resource utilization of unreserved fund balance in a future period.
The City's governmental funds reserves and designations at June 30, 2009, are presented below,
followed by explanations of the nature and purpose of each reserve and designation.
Reserved:
Capital Projects
Debt Service
Property Held for Resale/
Development
Prepaid Items
Total Reserved
Unreserved, Designated:
Future Projects
Reserved:
Capital Projects
Debt Service
Property Held for Resale/
Development
Prepaid Items
Total Reserved
Unreserved, Designated:
Future Projects
Redevelopment
MRA Highland Agency
General Area 1 Improvement Capital Projects
Fund Operations Fund Fund Fund
$ $ $ 14,014,926 $
9,117,374 2,041,544
373,209
$ 373,209 9,117,374 $ 14,014,926 $ 2,041,544
Redevelopment
Agency Non-Major
Special Projects Debt Service Governmental
1,884,722
6,655,250
5,200
$ $ 1,884,722 $ 6,660,450
$ 23,448,369 $ - $ -
62
176
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
13) CLASSIFICATION OF NET ASSETS AND FUND BALANCE - Continued
Reserved for Capital Projects
These funds are reserved for project expenditures related to the issuance of the CFD No. 2004 -1 bonds.
Reserved for Debt Service
These funds are reserved for restricted debt proceeds.
Reserved for Property Held for Resale/Development
These funds are reserved for property purchased by the City to be sold or otherwise used for the
development of the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Project Area or Low and Moderate Housing
Projects.
Reserved for Prepaid Items
These funds are reserved for prepaid items.
Unreserved, Designated for Future Projects
These funds have been designated for future capital projects.
Deficit Fund Balance
The following funds had a deficit at June 30, 2009
Police Facilities Fee Capital Projects Fund $(1,995,668)
Tierra Rejada/Spring Road Special Revenue Fund (167,317)
Management expects these deficits to be eliminated through future revenues.
14) EXPENDITURES IN EXCESS OF APPROPRIATIONS
The following funds had expenditures in excess of the budget in the following amounts for the year
ended June 30, 2009:
Community Development $ 145,233
Redevelopment Agency Debt Service Fund 496,933
63 177
City of Moorpark
Notes to Financial Statements
Year Ended June 30, 2009
15) COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES /SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
A) Commitments
The City has contracts with County of Ventura for various services, most notably law enforcement.
These service contracts are renegotiated annually and cancelable by the City or the County on May
31 of each year after 30 days notice has been given. These are based on an hourly rate and adjusted
throughout the fiscal year.
B) Contingencies /Subsequent Events
There are certain legal actions pending against the City which management considers incident to
normal operations, some of which seek substantial monetary damages. In the opinion of
management, after consultation with counsel, the ultimate resolution of such actions is not expected
to have a significant effect on the financial position or the results of operations of the City.
The City has received State and Federal funds for specific purposes that are subject to review by the
grantor agencies. Although such audits could generate expenditure disallowance under the terms of
the grants, it is believed that any disallowed amounts will not be material.
Subsequent to June 30, 2009, the State of California passed legislation to divert approximately
$2.05 billion of local redevelopment funds to use for State purposes, as part of the 2009/10 State
budget. This includes $1.7 billion in fiscal year 2009/10 and another $350 million in fiscal year
2010 /11. The California Redevelopment Association (CRA) has filed a lawsuit in Sacramento
Superior Court to challenge the constitutionality of this legislation. Currently, the effect that this
legislation and resulting lawsuit will have on the Agency's future revenues is unknown. If the
legislation is upheld in court then the Agency's share is approximately $1,925,000 in fiscal year
2009/10 and $395,000 in fiscal year 2010/11.
16) SPECIAL ITEMS
The Agency received $1,000,000 from the County of Ventura resulting from a settlement agreement
between the Agency and the County.
64 178
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
179
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - General Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
326,000
326,000
354,824
28,824
PROPERTY TAXES
305,000
305,000
303,305
(1,695)
Current Secured
$ 3,000,000
$ 3,000,000
$ 3,024,932
$ 24,932
Current Unsecured
50,000
50,000
35,866
(14,134)
Prior Year Secured /Unsecured
3,000
3,000
127,471
124,471
Supplemental Secured / Unsecured
100,000
100,000
101,677
1,677
Real Property Transfer Tax
175,000
175,000
112,298
(62,702)
Homeowners Property Exemption
30,000
30,000
45,090
15,090
Parcel Taxes
12,500
12,500
118,623
118,623
Property Taxes - VLF
1,133,500
1,133,500
2,964,454
2,964,454
Total Property Taxes
3,358,000
3,358,000
6,530,411
3,172,411
SALES TAXES
Sales and Use Tax
2,255,000
2,255,000
2,329,523
74,523
Sales Tax Compensation
755,000
755,000
849,227
94,227
Total Sales Taxes
3,010,000
3,010,000
3,178,750
168,750
FRANCHISE FEES
Franchise Fee - Adelphia
326,000
326,000
354,824
28,824
Franchise Fee - Edison
305,000
305,000
303,305
(1,695)
Franchise Fee - Gas
123,000
123,000
143,564
20,564
Franchise Fee - Oil
62,900
62,900
2,584
2,584
Franchise PEG Fees
15,694
15,694
Franchise GI Rubbish
185,000
185,000
189,013
4,013
Franchise Moorpark Rubbish
117,000
117,000
107,735
(9,265)
Landfill Local Impact Fee
65,000
65,000
45,135
(19,865)
CIWMP Fees
12,500
12,500
9,701
(2,799)
Total Franchise Fees
1,133,500
1,133,500
1,171,555
38,055
SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS
SBA - Storm Drain Maintenance
Total Special Benefit Assessments
LICENSES AND PERMITS
19,323 19,323
19,323 19,323
Business Registration
53,000
53,000
80,190
27,190
Filming Permits
7,000
7,000
6,150
(850)
NPDES Business Inspection Fees
2,900
2,900
1,968
(932)
Total Licenses and Permits
62,900
62,900
88,308
25,408
65
180
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - General Fund - Continued
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
FINES AND FORFEITURES
Municipal Code Fines
Animal Control Fines
Forfeiture & Penalties
Settlements -
Total Fines & Forfeitures
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
$ 140,000 $ 140,000 $ 184,492 $ 44,492
550 550 530 (20)
1,787 1,787
140,550 140,550 186,809 46,259
Investment Earnings
798,333
798,333
719,610
(78,723)
Rents and Concessions
125,000
125,000
120,843
(4,157)
Interest/ City MRA Advance
230,000
230,000
159,976
(70,024)
Total Money & Property
1,153,333
1,153,333
1,000,429
(152,904)
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
Other Admin Service Fees
Administrative Fees
Administrative Fees - CID
Park and Facility Use Fee
Contract Class Registration Fees
League Fees
Recreation Event Fees
Advertising in brochure
Other Community Services Fees
Photocopying
Sale of Documents
Special Police Dept Services
NSF Fees and Misc. Charges
Total Charges for Services
INTERGOVERNMENTAL
Off Highway Motor Vehicle
Motor Vehicle In Lieu
Other State Funds
County Grants
Other Federal Revenue/ Grants
Total Intergovernmental
77,000 77,000
80,000
80,000
82,250
82,250
115,000
115,000
64,000
64,000
220,200
220,200
8,000
8,000
1,000
1,000
1,300
1,300
45,000
45,000
1,000
1,000
694,750
694,750
1,000 1;000
2,953,000 2,953,000
17,835 17,835
9,281
2,971,835 2,981,116
125,131
48,131
5,979
5,979
4,323
(80,000)
91,386
9,136
182,606
67,606
98,019
34,019
216,778
(3,422)
11,165
3,165
1,847
1,847
554
(446)
240
(1,060)
31,458
(13,542)
1,550
550
766,713
71,963
155,043 (2,826,073)
66 181
(1,000)
125,307
(2,827,693)
4,323
4,323
21,196
3,361
4,217
(5,064)
155,043 (2,826,073)
66 181
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - General Fund - Continued
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
OTHER REVENUES
Sale General Fixed Assets
Contributions / Donations
Revenues not elsewhere classified
Expense Reimbursements
Restitution/ Insurance Proceeds
Total Other Revenues
Total Revenue
EXPENDITURES
Current:
General Government
Public Safety
Public Services
Parks and Recreation
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
$ 1,000 $
1,000
$
$ (1,000)
6,657,799
6,659,507
19,070
19,070
11,000
11,000
12,725
1,725
70,000
70,000
207,018
137,018
15,000
15,000
31,051
16,051
97,000
97,000
269,864
172,864
12,621,868
12,631,149
13,367,205
736,056
1,841,584
2,304,194
1,926,283
377,911
6,657,799
6,659,507
6,253,223
406,284
491,959
632,561
414,949
217,612
1,651,800
1,669,330
1,436,923
232,407
65,680
152,325
90,725
61,600
10,708,822
11,417,917
10,122,103
1,295,814
1,913,046
1,213,232
3,245,102
2,031,870
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In
402,000
454,678
464,718
10,040
Transfer Out
(2,313,405)
(2,718,114)
(4,311,166)
(1,593,052)
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
(1,911,405)
(2,263,436)
(3,846,448)
(1,583,012)
Net Change in Fund Balance
1,641
(1,050,204)
(601,346)
448,858
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
3,807,175
3,807,175
3,807,175
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 3,808,816
$ 2,756,971
$ 3,205,829
$ 448,858
67
182
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Street and Traffic Safety Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
Investment Earnings $ 631,463 $ 631,463 $ 474,772 $ (156,691)
Total Use of Money and Property 631,463 631,463 474,772 (156,691)
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
Other Development Fees
Total Charges for Services
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers Out
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balance
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
573,815 573,815 586,421 12,606
573,815 573,815 586,421 12,606
1,205,278 1,205,278 1,061,193 (144,085)
69,289 69,338 61,240 8,098
886,994 1,154,221 90,147 1,064,074
956,283 1,223,5 59 151,387 1,072,172
248,995 (18,281) 909,806 928,087
(29,017) (29,017)
(29,017) (29,017)
248,995 (47,298) 880,789
18,779,758 18,779,758 18,779,758
928,087
$ 19,028,753 $ 18,732,460 $ 19,660,547 $ 928,087
68
183
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual Community Development Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
City Admin Engin Contract
20,000
110,000
120,561
Variance with
City Admin Attny Contract
3,200
3,200
16,257
Final Budget
Contract Admin Fee
Budgeted Amounts
Actual
Positive
2,621
Original
Final
Amounts
(Negative)
4,060
Zone Clearance
70,000
REVENUES
39,600
(30,400)
Imaging Fees
8,000
LICENSES AND PERMTS
5,949
(2,051)
Advance Planning Fees
15,000
Misc. Business Permits
$
$
$ 405
$ 405
Street Vendor Permits
1,000
1,000
1,585
585
Home Occupation Permits
12,000
12,000
10,800
(1,200)
Sign Permits
5,000
5,000
7,305
2,305
Banner Permits
1,000
1,000
2,160
1,160
Residential Building Permits
468,436
468,436
365,318
(103,118)
Non Residential Building
207,775
207,775
116,966
(90,809)
Permit Adj Commercial
1,800
1,800
4,560
2,760
Permit Adj Industrial
600
600
Total Charges for Services
(600)
Permit Adj Residential
600
600
(600)
Temporary Use Permit
2,500
2,500
4,215
1,715
Encroachment Permits
12,000
12,000
33,788
21,788
Administrative Permits
8,000
8,000
9,600
1,600
Total Licenses and Permits
720,711
720,711
556,702
(164,009)
FINES AND FORFEITURES
Municipal Code Fines
1,500
1,500
6,148
4,648
Total Fines and Forfeitures
1,500
1,500
6,148
4,648
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
City Admin Engin Contract
20,000
110,000
120,561
10,561
City Admin Attny Contract
3,200
3,200
16,257
13,057
Contract Admin Fee
3,000
3,000
5,621
2,621
Other Admin Service Fees
500
500
4,560
4,060
Zone Clearance
70,000
70,000
39,600
(30,400)
Imaging Fees
8,000
8,000
5,949
(2,051)
Advance Planning Fees
15,000
15,000
25,353
10,353
Other Comm Develop Fees
4,000
4,000
914
(3,086)
Plan Check Residential
116,538
116,538
116,901
363
Plan Check Non Residential
104,150
104,150
59,634
(44,516)
Planning Time Charges
348,000
348,000
390,885
42,885
Public Improv Plan Check
45,000
115,000
104,744
(10,256)
Public Improv Inspections
151,286
151,286
187,163
35,877
Real Estate Fees
4,000
4,000
2,313
(1,687)
NSF Fees and Misc. Charges
500
500
(500)
Total Charges for Services
893,174
1,053,174
1,080,455
27,281
69
184
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Community Development Special Revenue Fund - Continued
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
OTHER REVENUES
Expense Reimbursements
Total Other Revenues
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
Total Expenditures
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
$ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ $ (2,500)
2,500 2,500 - (2,500)
1,617,885 1,777,885 1,643,305 (134,580)
2,574,711 2,268,239 2,413,472 (145,233)
2,574,711 2,268,239 2,413,472 (145,233)
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures (956,826) (490,354) (770,167) (279,813)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In 956,826 1,403,442 1,162,972 (240,470)
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balance
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
956,826 1,403,442 1,162,972 (240,470)
913,088 392,805 (520,283)
(392,805) (392,805) (392,805)
$ (392,805) $ 520,283 $
$ (520,283)
70
185
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Assessment District Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
REVENUES
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
Investment Earnings $ 111,405 $ 111,405 $ 138,105 $ 26,700
Total Use of Money and Property 111,405 111,405 138,105 26,700
SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS
SBA - Street Lighting
SBA - Landscape Maintenance
SBA - Storm Drain Maintenenace
SBA - Park Maintenance
Total Special Benefit Assessments
OTHER REVENUES
Expense Reimbursements
Tennis Court Lighting Use
Total Other Revenues
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Safety
Parks and Recreation
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
244,886
244,886
264,844
19,958
2,420,459
2,420,459
2,486,519
66,060
5,235
5,235
6,201
966
660,000
660,000
692,665
32,665
3,330,580
3,330,580
3,450,229
119,649
1,324,523
600
600
1,770
1,170
2,700
2,700
3,007
307
3,300
3,300
4,777
1,477
3,445,285
3,445,285
3,593,111
147,826
350,038
360,062
311,770
48,292
3,353,834
3,404,347
2,745,168
659,179
494,947
494,947
25,721
469,226
4,198,819
4,259,356
3,082,659
1,176,697
(753,534)
(814,071)
510,452
1,324,523
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In 1,530,366 1,493,732 1,357,750 (135,982)
Transfer Out - - (10,000) (10,000)
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses) 1,530,366 1,493,732 1,347,750 (145,982)
Net Change in Fund Balance 776,832 679,661 1,858,202 1,178,541
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 4,570,423 4,570,423 4,570,423
Fund Balance, End of Year $ 5,347,255 $ 5,250,084 $ 6,428,625 $ 1,178,541
71
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Endowment Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
REVENUES
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
Investment Earnings $
$ 98,000
$
$ (98,000)
Rents and Concessions
83,800
83,800
82,606
(1,194)
Total Use of Money and Property
83,800
181,800
82,606
(99,194)
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
Other Development Fees
772,853
772,853
376,316
(396,537)
Community Service Fees
44,839
44,839
26,785
(18,054)
Administration Fees
25,000
25,000
25,000
-
Total Charges for Services
842,692
842,692
428,101
(414,591)
Total Revenues
926,492
1,024,492
510,707
(513,785)
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
49,228
358,400
51,343
307,057
Total Expenditures
49,228
358,400
51,343
307,057
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
877,264
666,092
459,364
(206,728)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers Out - (3,368,697) (3,368,697) (3,368,697)
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balance
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
(3,368,697) (3,368,697) (3,368,697)
(2,491,433) (2,702,605) (2,909,333)
7,686,999 7,686,999 7,686,999
(206,728)
$ 5,195,566 $ 4,984,394 $ 4,777,666 $ (206,728)
72
187
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Park/Public Facilities Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
REVENUES
9,171
9,171
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
2,375
2,375
-
-
Investment Earnings
$ 215,131
$ 215,131
$ 125,638
$ (89,493)
Rents and Concessions
16,000
16,000
16,244
244
Total Use of Money and Property
231,131
231,131
141,882
(89,249)
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
5,489,541
4,143,121
1,115,868
Art in Public Places
319,140
319,140
169,528
(149,612)
Trees/Landscape Fees
7,775
7,775
71,056
63,281
Library Facilities Fees
176,948
176,948
34,205
(142,743)
Fees in Lieu of Park Land
515,207
515,207
75,420
(439,787)
Other Development Fees
10,290
10,290
10,846
556
Total Charges for Services
1,029,360
1,029,360
361,055
(668,305)
OTHER REVENUES
Revenues Not Classified Elsewhere
Sale Plans/Specifications
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Public Services
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
5,156,075 5,156,075 5,156,075
$ 927,025 $ 2,273,445 $ 4,554,690 $ 2,281,245
73
188
9,171
9,171
2,375
2,375
-
-
11,546
11,546
1,260,491
1,260,491
514,483
(746,008)
46,500
46,500
26,605
19,895
5,443,041
4,096,621
1,089,263
3,007,358
5,489,541
4,143,121
1,115,868
3,027,253
(4,229,050)
(2,882,630)
(601,385)
2,281,245
5,156,075 5,156,075 5,156,075
$ 927,025 $ 2,273,445 $ 4,554,690 $ 2,281,245
73
188
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - MRA Area 1 Operations Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
REVENUES
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
Rents and Concessions $ 62,750 $ 62,750 $ 44,595 $ (18,155)
Total Use of Money and Property 62,750 62,750 44,595 (18,155)
OTHER REVENUES
Ticket Sales
Advertising in Brochures
Sale Plans/Specifications
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Public Services
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In
Transfers Out
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balance
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
70,000 92,793 64,755
4,275
100 100 265
70,100 92,893 69,295
(28,038)
4,275
165
(23,598)
132,850 155,643 113,890 (41,753)
1,536,050 2,374,792 1,455,487 919,305
1,178,138 1,063,903 347,509 716,394
2,714,188 3,438,695 1,802,996 1,635,699
(2,581,338) (3,283,052) (1,689,106) 1,593,946
5,777,516 5,777,516
(48,233) (48,273) (40)
- (48,233) 5,729,243 5,777,476
(2,581,338) (3,331,285) 4,040,137 7,371,422
6,934,337 6,934,337 6,934,337
$ 4,352,999 $ 3,603,052 $ 10,974,474 $ 7,371,422
74
189
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Funding Progress for MRHP
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Schedule of Funding Progress for MRHP
*GASB 45 was implemented prospectively in fiscal year 2009. There were no previous actuarial valuations.
75 190
Actuarial
Accrued
UAAL as a
Actuarial
Actuarial
Liability
Unfunded
Percentage of
Valuation
Value of
(AAL) Entry
AAL
Funded
Covered
Covered
Date
Assets
Age
(UAAL)
Ratio
Payroll
Payroll
(A)
(B)
(B - A)
(A/13)
(C)
[(B A) /C]
06/30/08
$ -
$ 364,000
$ 364,000
0%
$ 4,519,000
8.055%
*GASB 45 was implemented prospectively in fiscal year 2009. There were no previous actuarial valuations.
75 190
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
191
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Police Facilities Fee Capital Projects Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENTS
Police Facilities Fees
Total Maintenance Assessments
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Public Safety
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
$ 225,783
$ 225,783
$ 22,423
$ (203,360)
225,783
225,783
22,423
(203,360)
225,783
225,783
22,423
(203,360)
1,000
1,000
74,302
(73,302)
104,389
103,489
103,489
105,389
104,489
74,302
30,187
120,394
121,294
(51,879)
(173,173)
(1,943,789)
(1,943,789)
(1,943,789)
$ (1,823,395)
$ (1,822,495)
$ (1,995,668)
$ (173,173)
76 192
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Redevelopment Agency Capital Projects Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
Investment Earnings $ 686,031 $ 686,031 $ 403,316 $ (282,715)
Total Use of Money and Property 686,031 686,031 403,316 (282,715)
OTHER REVENUES
Revenues Not Elsewhere Classified
Sale Plans /Specifications
Total Other Revenues -
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers Out
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balances
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balances, End of Year
3,330
3,330
3,660
3,660
6,990
6,990
686,031 686,031 410,306 (275,725)
47,400 113,289 (65,889)
12,053,153 15,553,472 813,288 14,740,184
12,053,153 15,600,872 926,577 14,674,295
(11,367,122) (14,914,841) (516,271) 14,398,570
(17,286) (4,863,609) (4,846,323)
(17,286) (4,863,609) (4,846,323)
(11,367,122) (14,932,127) (5,379,880) 9,552,247
21,668,552 21,668,552 21,668,552
$ 10,301,430 $ 6,736,425 $ 16,288,672 $ 9,552,247
77 193
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Redevelopment Agency Debt Service Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
PROPERTY TAXES
Homeowners Property Exemption
Tax Increment Secured
Tax Increment Unsecured
Total Property Taxes
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
$ 30,000
$ 30,000
$ 43,672
$ 13,672
5,700,000
5,700,000
6,121,054
421,054
830,000
830,000
889,706
59,706
6,560,000
6,560,000
7,054,432
494,432
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
Investment Earnings
342,060
342,060
224,688
(117,372)
Total Use of Money and Property
342,060
342,060
224,688
(117,372)
Total Revenues
6,902,060
6,902,060
7,279,120
377,060
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
2,800,000
2,800,000
3,366,958
(566,958)
Debt Service
Principal
475,000
475,000
475,000
-
Interest
1,627,921
1,627,921
1,557,896
70,025
Total Expenditures
4,902,921
4,902,921
5,399,854
(496,933)
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
1,999,139
1,999,139
1,879,266
(119,873)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In
152,117
152,117
152,117
-
Tranfers Out
(1,312,000)
(1,312,000)
(2,515,766)
(1,203,766)
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
(1,159,883)
(1,159,883)
(2,363,649)
(1,203,766)
SPECIAL ITEMS
County Settlement
1,000,000
1,000,000
-
Net Change in Fund Balance
839,256
1,839,256
515,617
(1,323,639)
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
1,630,441
1,630,441
1,630,441
Fund Balance, End of Year $
2,469,697
$ 3,469,697
$ 2,146,058
$ (1,323,639)
78 194
City of Moorpark
Non -Major Governmental Funds
June 30, 2009
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Library Services Fund — is used to account for the financial resources for the operation of the City's
public library system.
Traffic Safety Fund - is used to account for revenues collected from traffic fines and forfeitures, which
is used for crossing guards and parking enforcement.
Affordable Housing Fund (City) - is used to account for grants used for development of affordable
housing units.
Los Angeles Area of Contribution Fund - is used to account for the financial resources for capital
projects related to streets and other improvements within the Los Angeles project area.
Tierra Rejeda/Spring Road A.O.0 Fund - is used to account for the financial resources for capital
projects related to streets and other improvements within the Tierra Rejeda & Spring Road project area.
Casey /Gabbert Area of Contribution Fund - is used to account for the financial resources for capital
projects related to streets and other improvements within the Casey & Gabbert project area.
Freemont Storm Drain A.O.0 Fund - is used to account for the financial resources for capital projects
related to streets and other improvements within the Freemont Storm Drain project area.
State and Federal Assistance Fund - is used to account for Federal and State grants used for the
construction of street and related improvements and help fund law enforcement.
State Gas Tax Fund - is used to account for fees used for street maintenance, right -of -way acquisition
and street construction.
Proposition 1B Local Streets and Roads Fund — is used to account for funds received from the State of
California for specific transportation programs.
Proposition 1B Safety and Security Fund — is used to account for the financial resources of the Prop 1B
bonds used for the seismic safety of bridges and public transit.
Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund (MRA) - is used to account for the receipt of 20 percent of
the gross tax increment allocation, which is restricted for use on projects that increase or preserve the
supply of low and moderate income housing in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33334.
79 195
City of Moorpark
Non -Major Governmental Funds
June 30, 2009
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - Continued
Local Transportation Transit Fund - is used to account for fees used in local transportation and street
projects that help relieve traffic congestion programs and development.
Solid Waste Fund - is used to account for fees used on programs that promote resource conservation,
recycling, composting, and proper disposal of hazardous household waste.
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
Capital Projects Fund — is used to account for financial resources used for major capital projects of the
general government operations.
City Hall Building Fund - is used to account for the funds used to build the new Civic Center
Complex.
Equipment Replacement Fund - is used to account for the funds used to replace city equipment and
vehicles.
80
196
This page intentionally left blank
197
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabiliies
City of Moorpark
$ 2,825
$ 160
S
Due to Other Funds
Combining Balance Sheet
Deferred Revenue
Non -Major Governmental Funds
24,232
607,739
250,249
June 30, 2009
18,900
27,057
607,899
308,689
Fund Balances:
Special Revenue
Reserved For:
Los Angeles
Library
Traffic
Affordable
Area of
Services
Safety
Housing
Contribution
ASSETS
Unreserved, Reported In:
Cash and Investments
$ 787,699 $
455,659
$ 3,570,082
$ 11,641,856
Receivables:
11,717,658
Capital Projects Funds
Taxes
Total Fund Balances
768,842
498,827
Accounts
43
70,225
$ 787,742
$ 525,884
Notes
$ 12,026,347
607,739
250,249
Due From Other Funds
134,242
Prepaid Items
Property Held for Resale/Development
Total Assets
$ 787,742 $
525,884
$ 4,177,821
$ 12,026,347
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabiliies
$ 18,900
$ 2,825
$ 160
$ 58,440
Due to Other Funds
Deferred Revenue
24,232
607,739
250,249
Total Liabilities
18,900
27,057
607,899
308,689
Fund Balances:
Reserved For:
Property Held for Resale/Development
Prepaid Items
Unreserved, Reported In:
Special Revenue Funds
768,842
498,827
3,569,922
11,717,658
Capital Projects Funds
Total Fund Balances
768,842
498,827
3,569,922
11,717,658
Total Liabilities and Fund Balances
$ 787,742
$ 525,884
$ 4,177,821
$ 12,026,347
81 198-
295,151 62,566
$ - $ 81,101 $ 14,894 $ 1,497,953 $ 492,817 $ 1,138,635
$ 12,768 $
154,549
167,317
$ $ 9,471 $ 43,234 $
237,171
- - 246,642 43,234 -
(167,317) 81,101 14,894 1,251,311 449,583 1,138,635
(167,317) 81,101 14,894 1,251,311 449,583 1,138,635
$ - $ 81,101 $ 14,894 $ 1,497,953 $ 492,817 $ 1,138,635
Continued
82 199
Special Revenue
Tierra Rejada/ Casey /Gabbert
Freemont
State and
Prop 1B
Spring Road Area of
Storm Drain
Federal
State Gas Local Streets
A.O.0 Contribution
A.O.0
Assistance
Tax and Roads
$ $ 81,101
$ 14,894
$ 1,202,802
$ 430,251 $ 1,138,635
295,151 62,566
$ - $ 81,101 $ 14,894 $ 1,497,953 $ 492,817 $ 1,138,635
$ 12,768 $
154,549
167,317
$ $ 9,471 $ 43,234 $
237,171
- - 246,642 43,234 -
(167,317) 81,101 14,894 1,251,311 449,583 1,138,635
(167,317) 81,101 14,894 1,251,311 449,583 1,138,635
$ - $ 81,101 $ 14,894 $ 1,497,953 $ 492,817 $ 1,138,635
Continued
82 199
City of Moorpark
Combining Balance Sheet
Non -Major Governmental Funds - Continued
June 30, 2009
Special Revenue
Prop 1B Low and Local
Safety Moderate Transportation Solid
and Security Income Housing Transit Waste
ASSETS
Cash and Investments
Receivables:
Taxes
Accounts
Notes
Due From Other Funds
Prepaid Items
Property Held for Resale/Development
Total Assets
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabiliies
Due to Other Funds
Deferred Revenue
Total Liabilities
Fund Balances:
Reserved For:
Property Held for Resale/Development
Prepaid Items
Unreserved, Reported In:
Special Revenue Funds
Capital Projects Funds
Total Fund Balances
Total Liabilities and Fund Balances
$ 102,234 $ 621,582 $ 32,178 $ 959,483
4,488 117,497 23,960
141,898
5,200
6,655,250
$ 102,234 $ 7,428,418 $ 149,675 $ 983,443
$ $ 131,119 $ 42,752 $ 14,504
352,110
16,384 107,177
499,613 149,929 14,504
6,655,250
5,200
102,234 268,355 (254) 968,939
102,234 6,928,805 (254) 968,939
$ 102,234 $ 7,428,418 $ 149,675 $ 983,443
83 200
Capital Projects
Capital City Hall Equipment
Projects Building Replacement
Total
Nonmajor
Governmental
Funds
$ 107,681 $ 3,754,802 $ 458,184 $ 25,359,123
573,930
999,886
60,000 194,242
5,200
6,655,250
$ 167,681 $ 3,754,802 $ 458,184 $ 33,787,631
$ $ $ $ 334,173
743,830
1,005,781
2,083,784
6,655,250
5,200
20,662,730
167,681 3,754,802 458,184 4,380,667
167,681 3,754,802 458,184 31,703,847
$ 167,681 $ 3,754,802 $ 458,184 $ 33,787,631
84 201
City of Moorpark
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
Non -Major Governmental Funds
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Taxes
Fines and Forteitures
Use of Money and Property
Charges for Services
Intergovernmental
Other Revenue
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Safety
Public Services
Parks and Recreation
Capital Outlay
Debt Service:
Interest
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
Over Expenditures
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In
Transfers Out
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balances
Fund Balances, Beginning of Year
Fund Balances, End of Year
Special Revenue
Los Angeles
Library Traffic Affordable Area of
Services Safety Housing Contribution
$ 1,495,700 $ $ $
18,259 273,714
17,702 86,793 285,929
4,232 203,044 209,758
12,974
5,356
1,531,165 291,416 295,193 495,687
111,876
675,893 182,827
269,680
675,893 111,876 182,827 269,680
855,272 179,540 112,366 226,007
(402,000)
(81,380)
- (402,000)
- (81,380)
855,272 (222,460)
112,366 144,627
(86,430) 721,287
3,457,556 11,573,031
$ 768,842 $ 498,827 $ 3,569,922 $ 11,717,658
85 202
Special Revenue
Tierra Rejada/ Casey /Gabbert Freemont State and Prop 1B
Spring Road Area of Storm Drain Federal State Gas Local Streets
A.O.0 Contribution • A.O.0 Assistance Tax and Roads
708 1,978 363 31,633 16,064
94,639
1,845,852 602,923 537,418
590 1,320 7,723
95,937 1,978 363 1,878,805 610,646 553,482
118,662
118,662 -
(22,725) 1,978
63,254
14,733 1,407,744
494,658 52,920
572,645 1,460,664 -
363 1,306,160 (850,018) 553,482
86 203
1,211,625
(8,969)
(1,107,970)
(162,444)
(8,969)
- - (1,107,970)
1,049,181
-
(31,694)
1,978 363 198,190
199,163
553,482
(135,623)
79,123 14,531 1,053,121
250,420
585,153
$ (167,317) $
81,101 $ 14,894 $ 1,251,311
$ 449,583
$ 1,138,635
Continued
86 203
City of Moorpark
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
Non -Major Governmental Funds - Continued
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Taxes
Fines and Forteitures
Use of Money and Property
Charges for Services
Intergovernmental
Other Revenue
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Safety
Public Services
Parks and Recreation
Capital Outlay
Debt Service:
Interest
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
Over Expenditures
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In
Transfers Out
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)
Special Revenue
Prop 1B Low and Local
Safety Moderate Transportation Solid
and Security Income Housing Transit Waste
$ $ $ $ 285,788
2,234 28,494 7,414 23,517
75,781 2,960
100,000 658,522 35,327
75 21,003
102,234 28,494 741,792 368,595
318,243 373,572 434,285
234,174 337,167
36,166
588,583 710,739 434,285
102,234 (560,089) 31,053 (65,690)
1,410,886 13,178
(153,359)
1,257,527 13,178 -
Net Change in Fund Balances
102,234 697,438
44,231
(65,690)
Fund Balances, Beginning of Year
6,231,367
(44,485)
1,034,629
Fund Balances, End of Year
$ 102,234 $ 6,928,805
$ (254)
$ 968,939
87 204
Capital Projects Total
Nonmajor
Capital City Hall Equipment Governmental
Projects Building Replacement Funds
$ $ $ $ 1,781,488
291,973
954 18,725 11,488 533,996
590,414
3,793,016
36,067
954 18,725 11,488 7,026,954
6,960 24,315
175,130
3,407,297
19,919 1,558,455
36,166
6,960 24,315 19,919 5,177,048
(6,006) (5,590) (8,431) 1,849,906
173,687 3,368,697
173,687 3,368,697
167,681 3,363,107
6,178,073
(1,916,122)
4,261,951
(8,431) 6,111,857
391,695 466,615 25,591,990
$ 167,681 $ 3,754,802 $ 458,184 $ 31,703,847
88 205
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Library Services Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Taxes
Fines and Forfeitures
Charges for Services
Intergovernmental
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
$ 811,000 $ 811,000 $ 1,495,700 $ 684,700
25,000
25,000
18,259
(6,741)
3,000
3,000
4,232
1,232
13,887
13,887
12,974
(913)
852,887
852,887
1,531,165
678,278
797,507
806,856
675,893
130,963
797,507
806,856
675,893
130,963
55,380
46,031
855,272
809,241
(86,430)
(86,430)
(86,430)
$ (31,050) $
(40,399) $
768,842 $
809,241
89 206
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Traffic Safety Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Fines and Forfeitures
Use of Money and Property
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Safety
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
$ 155,000 $ 155,000 $ 273,714 $ 118,714
23,050 23,050 17,702 (5,348)
178,050 178,050 291,416 113,366
114,433 114,854 111,876 2,978
114,433 114,854 111,876 2,978
63,617 63,196 179,540 116,344
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer Out (402,000) (402,000) (402,000) -
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses) (402,000) (402,000) (402,000) -
Net Change in Fund Balance
(338,383)
(338,804)
(222,460) 116,344
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
721,287
721,287
721,287
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 382,904
$ 382,483
$ 498,827 $ 116,344
a
207
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Affordable Housing Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
REVENUES
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
Use of Money and Property
$ 105,884
$ 105,884
$ 86,793
$ (19,091)
Charges for Services
406,070
406,070
203,044
(203,026)
Other Revenue
5,356
5,356
Total Revenues
511,954
511,954
295,193
(216,761)
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
65,200
201,200
182,827
18,373
Total Expenditures
65,200
201,200
182,827
18,373
Net Change in Fund Balance
446,754
310,754
112,366
(198,388)
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
3,457,556
3,457,556
3,457,556
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 3,904,310
$ 3,768,310
$ 3,569,922
$ (198,388)
91
1'
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Los Angeles Area of Contribution Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
Charges for Services
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
$ 398,806 $ 398,806 $ 285,929 $ (112,877)
663,460 663,460 209,758 (453,702)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers Out
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balance
1,062,266 1,062,266 495,687 (566,579)
5,055,019 5,598,787 269,680 5,329,107
5,055,019 5,598,787 269,680 5,329,107
(3,992,753) (4,536,521) 226,007 4,762,528
(81,380) (81,380)
(81,380) (81,380)
(3,992,753) (4,617,901) 144,627 4,762,528
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
11,573,031
11,573,031
11,573,031
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 7,580,278
$ 6,955,130
$ 11,717,658 $ 4,762,528
92
209
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Tierra Rejada/Spring Road A.O.0 Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property $
$
$ 708
$ 708
Charges for Services
307,176
307,176
94,639
(212,537)
Other Revenue
590
590
Total Revenues
307,176
307,176
95,937
(211,239)
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
45,197
143,866
118,662
25,204
Total Expenditures
45,197
143,866
118,662
25,204
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
261,979
163,310
(22,725)
(186,035)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers Out
(8,969)
(8,969)
-
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
-
(8,969)
(8,969)
-
Net Change in Fund Balance
261,979
154,341
(31,694)
(186,035)
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
(135,623)
(135,623)
(135,623)
Fund Balance, End of Year $
126,356
$ 18,718
$ (167,317)
$ (186,035)
93
210
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Cassey /Gabbert Area of Contribution Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
$ 2,641 $
2,641 $
1,978 $
(663)
2,641
2,641
1,978
(663)
2,641 2,641 1,978 (663)
79,123 79,123 79,123
$ 81,764 $ 81,764 $ 81,101 $ (663)
94
211
95
212
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues,
Expenditures, and Changes in
Fund Balances
Budget and Actual - Freemont
Storm Drain A.O.0 Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts
Actual
Positive
Original Final
Amounts
(Negative)
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
$ 480 $ 480
$ 363
$ (117)
Total Revenues
480 480
363
(117)
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
-
Total Expenditures
- -
-
-
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
480 480
363
(117)
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
14,531 14,531
14,531
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 15,011 $ 15,011
$ 14,894
$ (117)
95
212
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - State and Federal Assistance Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
Intergovernmental
Other Revenue
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Safety
Public Services
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
$ 41,057 $ 41,057 $ 31,633 $ (9,424)
2,667,025 3,039,023 1,845,852 (1,193,171)
1,320 1,320
2,708,082 3,080,080 1,878,805 (1,201,275)
100,000
100,000
63,254
36,746
33,850
33,850
14,733
19,117
2,073,049
2,013,249
494,658
1,518,591
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
2,206,899
2,147,099
572,645
1,574,454
$ 446,334
501,183
932,981
1,306,160
373,179
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers Out (1,107,970) (1,107,970) (1,107,970) -
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
(1,107,970)
(1,107,970)
(1,107,970) -
Net Change in Fund Balance
(606,787)
(174,989)
198,190 373,179
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
1,053,121
1,053,121
1,053,121
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 446,334
$ 878,132
$ 1,251,311 $ 373,179
.,
213
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - State Gas Tax Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
REVENUES
Actual
Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
Use of Money and Property $
$
$
$
Intergovernmental
721,000
721,000
602,923
(118,077)
Other Revenue
7,723
7,723
Total Revenues
721,000
721,000
610,646
(110,354)
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
1,529,419
1,532,246
1,407,744
124,502
Capital Outlay
125,765
120,317
52,920
67,397
Total Expenditures
1,655,184
1,652,563
1,460,664
191,899
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
(934,184)
(931,563)
(850,018)
81,545
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In
1,107,970
1,211,625
1,211,625
-
Transfers Out
(173,787)
(162,444)
(162,444)
-
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
934,183
1,049,181
1,049,181
-
Net Change in Fund Balance
(1)
117,618
199,163
81,545
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
250,420
250,420
250,420
Fund Balance, End of Year $
250,419
$ 368,038
$ 449,583
$ 81,545
97
214
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Prop 1B Local Streets and Roads Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
98
215
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts
Actual
Positive
Original
Final
Amounts
(Negative)
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
$
$ 12,000
$ 16,064
$ 4,064
Intergovernmental
537,418
537,418
-
Total Revenues
-
549,418
553,482
4,064
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
581,448
581,448
581,448
Total Expenditures
581,448
581,448
-
581,448
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
(581,448)
(32,030)
553,482
585,512
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
585,153
585,153
585,153
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 3,705
$ 553,123
$ 1,138,635
$ 585,512
98
215
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Prop 1B Safety and Security Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
Intergovernmental
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ $ $ 2,234 $ 2,234
100,000 100,000 100,000 -
100,000 100,000 102,234 2,234
100,000 100,000
100,000 100,000
100,000
100,000
102,234 102,234
$ - $ - $ 102,234 $ 102,234
..
216
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Low and Moderate Income Housing Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
Capital Outlay
Debt Service:
Interest
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
$ 100,909 $ 100,909 $ 28,494 $ (72,415)
100,909 100,909 28,494 (72,415)
2,120,229 2,198,329 318,243 1,880,086
378,950 443,366 234,174 209,192
31,000 36,166 36,166
Total Expenditures
2,530,179
2,677,861
588,583
2,089,278
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
(2,429,270)
(2,576,952)
(560,089)
2,016,863
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In
1,312,000
1,312,000
1,410,886
98,886
Transfers Out
(152,117)
(153,359)
(153,359)
-
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
1,159,883
1,158,641
1,257,527
98,886
Net Change in Fund Balance
(1,269,387)
(1,418,311)
697,438
2,115,749
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
6,231,367
6,231,367
6,231,367
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 4,961,980
$ 4,813,056
$ 6,928,805
$ 2,115,749
100
217
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Local Transportation Transit Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property $
6,963
$ 6,963 $
7,414 $
451
Charges for Services
60,000
60,000
75,781
15,781
Intergovernmental
775,779
276,506
658,522
382,016
Other Revenue
75
75
Total Revenues
842,742
343,469
741,792
398,323
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
718,822
721,834
373,572
348,262
Capital Outlay
236,695
267,567
337,167
(69,600)
Total Expenditures
955,517
989,401
710,739
278,662
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
(112,775)
(645,932)
31,053
676,985
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In
13,178
13,178
-
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
-
13,178
13,178
-
Net Change in Fund Balance
(112,775)
(632,754)
44,231
676,985
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
(44,485)
(44,485)
(44,485)
Fund Balance, End of Year $
(157,260)
$ (677,239) $
(254) $
676,985
101
218
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Solid Waste Special Revenue Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
Taxes
$ 295,000
$ 295,000
$ 285,788 $
(9,212)
Use of Money and Property
34,334
34,334
23,517
(10,817)
Charges for Services
2,960
2,960
Intergovernmental
48,965
48,965
35,327
(13,638)
Other Revenue
21,003
21,003
Total Revenues
378,299
378,299
368,595
(9,704)
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Services
389,125
401,506
434,285
(32,779)
Capital Outlay
68,758
95,000
95,000
Total Expenditures
457,883
496,506
434,285
62,221
Net Change in Fund Balance
(79,584)
(118,207)
(65,690)
52,517
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
1,034,629
1,034,629
1,034,629
Fund Balance, End of Year
$ 955,045
$ 916,422
$ 968,939 $
52,517
102
219
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Capital Projects Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer In
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balance
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year $ - $ (210,000) $ 167,681 $ 377,681
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
$ $ $ 954 $ 954
- 954 954
210,000 6,960 203,040
- 210,000 6,960 203,040
(210,000) (6,006) 203,994
173,687 173,687
- 173,687 173,687
(210,000) 167,681 377,681
103
220
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - City Hall Building Capital Projects Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property
Total Revenues
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Amounts (Negative)
$ 14,406 $ 14,406 $ 18,725 $ 4,319
14,406 14,406 18,725 4,319
3,764,754 3,773,109 24,315 3,748,794
3,764,754 3,773,109 24,315 3,748,794
(3,750,348) (3,758,703) (5,590) 3,753,113
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer In 3,368,697 3,368,697 3,368,697
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balance
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
3,368,697 3,368,697 3,368,697
(381,651) (390,006) 3,363,107
391,695 391,695 391,695
3,753,113
$ 10,044 $ 1,689 $ 3,754,802 $ 3,753,113
104
221
City of Moorpark
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual - Equipment Replacement Capital Projects Fund
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property $ 17,047 $ 17,047 $ 11,488 $ (5,559)
Total Revenues 17,047 17,047 11,488 (5,559)
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay 1,800 41,366 19,919 21,447
Total Expenditures 1,800 41,366 19,919 21,447
Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues
over Expenditures 15,247 (24,319) (8,431) 15,888
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer In -
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses)
Net Change in Fund Balance
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
15,247 (24,319) (8,431) 15,888
466,615 466,615 466,615
$ 481,862 $ 442,296 $ 458,184 $ 15,888
105
222
City of Moorpark
Statement of Changes in Net Assets
Agency Funds
Year Ended June 30, 2009
Balance at Balance at
July 1, 2008 Additions Deletions June 30, 2009
ASSETS
Cash and Investments
$ 4,038,463 $
$ (741,075) $
3,297,388
Restricted Cash and Investments
6,442,184
65,271
6,507,455
Accounts Receivable
1,104
25,219
26,323
Accounts Receivable
$ 10,481,751 $
21,532
21,532
Total Assets
$ 10,481,751 $
112,022 $ (741,075) $
9,852,698
LIABILITIES
Accounts Payable
$ 319,241 $
$ (137,195) $
182,046
Developer Deposits
3,567,978
(451,359)
3,116,619
Due to Bondholders
6,594,532
(40,509)
6,554,023
Total Liabilities
$ 10,481,751 $
- $ (629,063) $
9,852,688
106
223
STATISTICAL SECTION
224
CITY OF MOORPARK
Net Assets by Component
Last Seven Fiscal Years
(accrual basis of accounting)
Total governmental activities net assets $ 159,106,739 $ 167,310,012 $ 172,580,040 $ 193,142,118 $ 233,008,403 $ 235,325,649 $ 239,673,695
The City of Moorpark has elected to report retroactively back to the year the City
implemented GASB 34 (June 30, 2003).
The City of Moorpark does not have any business -type activities.
107
225
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Governmental activities:
Invested in capital assets
not ofrelated debt
$ 85,969,804 $
93,941,392 $
99,760,671 $
108,190,324 $
125,900,770 $
130,071,108 $
130,581,499
Restricted
39,344,368
41,506,906
46,405,391
57,986,366
100,649,409
101,613,368
94,878,693
Unrestricted
33,792,567
31,861,714
26,413,978
26,965,428
6,458,224
3,641,173
14,213,503
Total governmental activities net assets $ 159,106,739 $ 167,310,012 $ 172,580,040 $ 193,142,118 $ 233,008,403 $ 235,325,649 $ 239,673,695
The City of Moorpark has elected to report retroactively back to the year the City
implemented GASB 34 (June 30, 2003).
The City of Moorpark does not have any business -type activities.
107
225
CITY OF MOORPARK
Changes in Net Assets
Last Seven Fiscal Years
(accrual basis of accounting)
Fiscal Year
108
226
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Expenses:
General government $
2,116,644
$ 2,351,860
$ 3,030,395
$ 3,044,381
$ 1,639,628
$ 1,949,206
$ 2,041,596
Public safety
4,142,268
4,902,148
5,709,323
6,230,057
6,317,283
6,882,072
7,035,384
Public services
7,150,513
10,957,272
9,844,050
13,106,843
21,231,766
20,580,204
18,170,325
Parks and recreation
2,276,066
2,600,523
2,304,852
2,771,270
4,293,823
4,551,045
4,470,524
Interest on long -term debt
1,040,854
1,097,421
978,843
1,333,370
1,332,541
1,773,841
1,616,843
Total governmental activities expense
16,726,345
21,909,224
21,867,463
26,485,921
34,815,041
35,736,368
33,334,672
Program revenues:
Charges for services:
General government
509,401
1,407,130
2,010,540
2,201,590
191,674
283,576
232,926
Public safety
708,392
369,795
344,019
340,341
598,500
633,131
538,636
Public services
2,166,168
4,181,363
2,776,976
4,163,781
6,612,769
5,743,200
3,172,708
Parks and recreation
322,772
536,238
501,283
536,166
604,904
756,885
644,979
Total charges for services
3,706,733
6,494,526
5,632,818
7,241,878
8,007,847
7,416,792
4,589,249
Operating contributions and grants
5,440,099
4,077,849
2,313,834
3,237,143
4,489,945
7,113,883
6,172,315
Capital contributions and grants
4,131,439
4,731,311
4,633,166
18,027,831
38,337,638
5,481,972
3,326,778
Total governmental activities
program revenues
13,278,271
15,303,686
12,579,818
28,506,852
50,835,430
20,012,647
14,088,342
Net program revenues (expenses)
(3,448,074)
(6,605,538)
(9,287,645)
2,020,931
16,020,389
(15,723,721)
(19,246,330)
General revenues and other changes in net
assets:
Taxes:
Property tax
2,413,964
2,658,230
2,655,093
2,929,842
3,334,491
4,505,980
7,802,643
Property tax, Redevelopment Agency
3,577,050
4,116,542
3,901,779
5,530,198
6,347,692
6,887,079
7,054,432
Franchise tax
1,067,669
919,290
955,829
1,080,893
1,126,951
1,150,180
1,171,556
Sales tax
1,664,626
2,176,893
2,046,368
2,260,786
2,192,327
2,306,281
2,329,522
Sales tax in lieu
-
-
537,485
608,298
704,562
779,263
849,227
Motor vehicle in lieu
2,161,324
1,570,551
2,836,154
2,734,470
2,860,207
3,038,440
125,307
Investment income
2,027,190
1,363,344
1,725,579
3,261,384
6,556,186
2,491,856
2,875,649
Other
21,479
177,380
1,160,805
135,276
58,841
139,728
386,040
Gain on sale of property
-
-
48,339
-
276,797
-
-
Special item (1)
-
(900,000)
-
-
-
-
-
County settlement
-
-
-
-
-
-
1,000,000
Total governmental activities
12,933,302
12,082,230
15,867,431
18,541,147
23,458,054
21,298,807
23,594,376
Changes in net assets -
governmental activities $
9,485,228
$ 5,476,692
$ 6,579,786
$ 20,562,078
$ 39,478,443
$ 5,575,086
$ 4,348,046
The City of Moorpark has elected to report retroactively back to the year the City
implemented GASB 34 (June 30, 2003).
(1) Mission Bell note
108
226
CITY OF MOORPARK
Fund Balances of Governmental Funds
Last Seven Fiscal Years
(modified accrual basis of accounting)
All other governmental funds
Reserved
2003 2004 2005
2006
2007 2008
2009
General fund:
$ 35,103,620
$ 33,719,016
Unreserved, reported in:
Reserved
$ - $ - $ 5,772,444
$ 2,943,353
$ - $ 95,397
$ 373,209
Unreserved
13,456,231 14,756,222 12,527,255
18,301,058
24,405,620 3,625,348
2,832,620
Total general fund
$ 13,456,231 $ 14,756,222 $ 18,299,699
$ 21,244,411
$ 24,405,620 $ 3,720,745
$ 3,205,829
All other governmental funds
Reserved
$ 4,378,065 $
4,099,849
$ 13,889,036
$ 14,124,235
$ 41,864,116
$ 35,103,620
$ 33,719,016
Unreserved, reported in:
Special revenue funds
32,857,500
29,994,471
26,977,320
36,903,391
41,486,631
42,761,089
37,278,628
Capital projects funds
9,625,965
8,950,250
3,361,134
1,293,998
16,807,370
39,098,065
35,699,829
Debt Service funds
(97,935)
(891,297)
(346,716)
(321,425)
83,243
(1,025,927)
261,336
Non -major funds
7,146,987
10,651,331
8,272,652
9,724,941
8,693,969
13,384,413
25,043,397
Total all other governmental funds $ 53,910,582 $ 52,804,604 $ 52,153,426 $ 61,725,140 $ 108,935,329 $ 129,321,260 $ 132,002,206
The City of Moorpark has elected to report retroactively back to the year the City
implemented GASB 34 (June 30, 2003).
109
227
CITY OF MOORPARK
Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds
Last Seven Fiscal Years
(modified accrual basis of accounting)
Fiscal Year
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Revenues:
Taxes
$ 8,490,985
$ 9,870,955
$ 9,139,722
$ 12,231,076
$ 13,706,024
$ 15,392,269
$ 19,716,636
Licenses and permits
51,083
63,146
54,180
72,365
65,630
72,951
645,010
Fines and forfeitures
290,054
306,871
344,019
340,341
343,579
358,665
484,930
Uses of money and property
2,027,190
1,363,006
1,924,579
3,261,384
7,085,104
5,684,111
3,114,881
Charges for services
867,731
2,001,561
2,558,974
2,665,391
338,929
677,277
3,813,159
Intergovernmental
4,051,263
4,298,009
5,150,992
6,302,193
6,163,985
7,549,040
3,948,059
Maintenance assessments
2,955,340
2,639,628
1,963,190
1,845,742
1,922,471
4,205,700
3,491,975
Franchise fees
232,324
257,127
1,231,763
283,162
292,003
301,514
398,539
Building and safety fees
608,879
595,138
431,959
1,110,715
716,552
530,761
-
Planning and public work fees
2,132,190
2,614,959
1,967,751
3,053,066
1,649,002
1,938,143
-
Development fees
4,486,128
4,097,977
2,669,976
15,568,347
6,403,851
4,501,837
-
Contributions from prop owners
-
-
-
-
34,066,993
-
-
Other
256,376
281,506
2,832,962
397,574
2,030,211
433,378
-
Total revenues
26,449,543
28,389,883
30,270,067
47,131,356
74,784,334
41,645,646
35,613,189
Expenditures
Current:
General government
2,048,658
2,259,017
2,893,359
2,919,564
1,471,354
1,835,801
1,926,283
Public safety
4,127,670
4,882,547
5,690,820
6,211,461
6,083,917
6,637,757
6,814,425
Public services
8,765,039
8,401,453
8,098,147
11,215,406
9,608,754
12,505,613
11,259,297
Parks and recreation
2,063,428
2,381,698
2,081,723
2,544,206
4,039,888
4,291,867
4,182,091
Capital outlay
3,596,982
8,775,159
7,810,879
10,038,439
19,477,866
14,682,017
8,100,604
Debt service:
Principal
365,000
395,000
405,000
435,910
440,000
455,000
475,000
Interest
1,044,915
1,100,996
1,158,585
1,251,354
1,400,985
1,631,932
1,594,062
Bond issuance costs
-
-
-
-
505,588
-
Total expenditures
22,011,692
28,195,870
28,138,513
34,616,340
43,028,352
42,039,987
34,351,762
Excess of revenues over
expenditures
4,437,851
194,013
2,131,554
12,515,016
31,755,982
(394,341)
1,261,427
Other financing sources (uses):
Gain from sale of property
-
-
48,339
1,410
276,797
-
-
Bond Proceeds
-
-
-
-
11,695,000
-
-
Discount on Bonds
-
-
-
-
(325,401)
-
-
County settlements
1,000,000
Transfers in
3,781,938
3,588,717
2,027,315
3,352;002
9,457,260
27,626,755
17,062,650
Transfers out
(3,781,938)
(3,588,717)
(2,027,315)
(3,352,002)
(9,457,260)
(27,626,755)
(17,062,650)
Total other financing
sources (uses)
-
-
48,339
1,410
11,646,396
-
1,000,000
Net change in fund balances
$ 4,437,851
$ 194,013
$ 2,179,893
$ 12,516,426
$ 43,402,378
$ 394,341
$ 2,261,427
Debt service as a percentage of
noncapital expenditures
8.3%
8.3%
8.3%
7.4%
8.7%
8.3%
8.6%
The City of Moorpark has elected to report retroactively back to the year the City implemented
GASB 34 (June 30, 2003).
110
228
CITY OF MOORPARK
Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property
Last Ten Fiscal Years
NOTE:
In 1978 the voters of the State of California passed Proposition 13 which limited property taxes to a total maximum rate of 1% based upon the assessed value of the
property being taxed. Each year, the assessed value of property maybe increased by an "inflation factor" (limited to a maximum increase of 2 %). With few
exceptions, property is only re- assessed at the time that it is sold to a new owner. At that point, the new assessed value is reassessed at the purchase price of the
property sold. The assessed valuation data shown above represents the only data currently available with respect to the actual market value of taxable property and is
subject to the limitations described above.
Source: Ventura County Assessors Office
III
229
City
Redevelopment
Agency
Fiscal Year
Taxable
Taxable
Total
Ended
Less:
Assessed
Less:
Assessed
Direct Tax
June 30
Secured
Unsecured
Exemptions
Value
Secured
Unsecured
Exemptions
Value
Rate
2000 S
2,149,505,500 $
84,834,286
$ 40,687,060 $
2,275,026,846 $
397,463,516 $
47,384,350
$ 3,808,526 S
448,656,392
1.042%
2001
2,421,104,221
92 ,634,149
40,786,802
2,554,525,172
434,091,609
59,042,494
3,849,357
496,983,460
1.051%
2002
2,549,782,519
94,204,773
41,025,922
2,685,013,214
456,765,976
64,634,089
3,860,792
525,260,857
1.042%
2003
2,823,727,286
120,175,258
42,238,926
2,986,141,470
514,599,965
84,435,148
3,862,434
602,897,547
1.061%
2004
3,026,137,647
155,943,246
43,185,512
3,225,266,405
542,789,850
95,244,418
3,915,879
641,950,147
1.058%
2005
3,231,418,940
172,769,806
43,305,637
3,447,494,383
532,445,978
93,810,856
3,904,910
630,161,744
1.05011.
2006
3,721,591,791
168,802,350
43,313,074
3,933,707,215
660,810,677
99,693,057
3,931,766
764,435,500
1.055%
2007
4,157,360,033
165,798,359
43,364,070
4,366,522,462
743,592,913
102,795,641
3,958,627
850,347,181
1.062%
2008
4,558,597,806
173,209,606
45,607,510
4,777,414,922
809,452,407
102,442,198
4,276,693
916,171,298
1.05011.
2009
4,700,305,496
174,181,146
46,351,377
4,920,838,019
1828,244,210
102,730,045
4,309,164
935,283,419
1.0506/6
NOTE:
In 1978 the voters of the State of California passed Proposition 13 which limited property taxes to a total maximum rate of 1% based upon the assessed value of the
property being taxed. Each year, the assessed value of property maybe increased by an "inflation factor" (limited to a maximum increase of 2 %). With few
exceptions, property is only re- assessed at the time that it is sold to a new owner. At that point, the new assessed value is reassessed at the purchase price of the
property sold. The assessed valuation data shown above represents the only data currently available with respect to the actual market value of taxable property and is
subject to the limitations described above.
Source: Ventura County Assessors Office
III
229
CITY OF MOORPARK
Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates
(Rate per $100 of assessed value)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
City Direct Rates:
City basic rate 1.04244 1.05062 1.04171 1.06072 1.05820 1.05020 1.05480 1.06163 1.04955 1.0495
Redevelopment agency - - -
Total City Direct Rate 1.042
1.051 1.042
1.061
1.058
1.050
1.055
1.062
1.050
1.050
Overlapping Rates:
Ventura County Flood Cont 8.012
8.012 8.039
8.097
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Metropolitan Water District 0.222
0.222 0.229
2.340
0.233
0.232
0.235
0.233
0.234
0.230
Ventura Community College n/a
n/a n/a
4.312
4.311
4.269
4.331
4.296
4.361
4.371
Ventura County Waterworks 100.000
100.000 n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Conejo Valley Unified School
District 0.021
0.021 0.027
0.025
0.024
2.200
0.020
0.019
0.018
0.018
Moorpark Unified School
District n/a
n/a 92.311
91.733
91.959
92.121
92.442
92.313
92.417
92.240
City of Moorpark 100.000
100.000 100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
City of Moorpark Community
Facilities District No. 97 -1 n/a
n/a 100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
City of Moorpark 1915 Act
Bonds 100.000
100.000 100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
Total Direct Rate 109.297
109.306 101.648
107.568
97.585
99.872
98.083
97.923
98.080
97.909
NOTE:
1) In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 13 which sets the property
tax rate at
a 1.00% fixed amount This 1.0(r is shared by
all taxing agencies for which the subject property
resides within. In addition to the 1.00% fixed amount, property owners are charged
taxes as a percentage of assessed property values for the payment of the Moorpark Unified School District bonds.
2) The direct and overlapping bonded debt above
is not the City's nor the Redevelopment Agency's
obligation.
112
230
CITY OF MOORPARK
Principal Property Tax Payers
Current Year and Nine Years Ago
* Due to varying tax rates, the assessed value does not necessarily mean the highest tax.
The assessed value includes secured.
Source: HdL 2008 -2009 property data
113
231
2009
2000
nt
Perce of
Percent of
Total City
Total City
Taxable
Taxable
Taxable
Taxable
Assessed
Assessed
Assessed
Assessed
Taxpayer
Value *
Value
Value
Value
DBRE Moorpark LLC $
68,371,546
13.89%
$ -
0.00%
Waterstone Properties Moorpark LLC
65,825,559
13.38%
-
0.00%
G & Y Moorpark LLC
25,183,900
5.12%
-
0.00%
Mission Bell West LP
23,948,893
4.87%
20,208,563
7.91%
James Birkenshaw, Et. Al.
19,523,166
3.97%
12,264,597
4.80%
Calabasas BCD Inc.
19,171,316
3.90%
11,751,954
4.60%
Fred Kavli
15,468,544
3.14%
12,701,599
4.97%
Mission Bell East LLC
13,848,034
2.81%
14,297,706
5.60%
Leonard Rose Trust
11,720,030
2.38%
9,998,062
3.91%
6100 Condor LLC
11,645,300
2.37%
-
0.00%
$
274,706,288
55.83%
$ 81,222,481
31.80%
* Due to varying tax rates, the assessed value does not necessarily mean the highest tax.
The assessed value includes secured.
Source: HdL 2008 -2009 property data
113
231
CITY OF MOORPARK
Property Tax Levies and Collections
Last Ten Fiscal Years
NOTE:
The amount presented includes City property taxes
only.
Source: Ventura County Auditor Controller's Office
114
232
Collected within the
Fiscal
Taxes Levied
Fiscal Year of Levy
Year Ended
for the
Percent
June 30
Fiscal Year
Amount
of Levy
2000
$ 1,410,082
$ 1,385,028
95.20%
2001
1,573,688
1,506,396
95.72%
2002
1,832,673
1,802,895
98.38%
2003
2,036,839
2,009,255
98.65%
2004
2,208,605
2,180,794
98.74%
2005
2,391,927
2,359,181
98.95%
2006
2,705,083
2,668,950
98.66%
2007
3,010,493
2,940,209
97.67%
2008
3,286,857
3,163,641
96.25%
2009
3,763,078
3,603,423
95.76%
NOTE:
The amount presented includes City property taxes
only.
Source: Ventura County Auditor Controller's Office
114
232
CITY OF MOORPARK
Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Governmental Activities
Fiscal Year General Tax Total Total Percentage Debt
Ended Obligation Allocation Governmental Primary of Personal Per
June 30 Bonds Bonds 1 Activities Government Income 2 Capita 2
2000
- $ 9,540,000
$ 9,540,000
$ 9,540,000
0.44%
321
2001
- 15,424,000
15,424,000
15,424,000
0.64%
480
2002
- 20,465,000
20,465,000
20,465,000
0.73%
606
2003
- 20,100,000
20,100,000
20,100,000
0.67%
582
2004
- 19,705,000
19,705,000
19,705,000
0.65%
564
2005
- 19,300,000
19,300,000
19,300,000
0.64%
537
2006
- 18,880,000
18,880,000
18,880,000
0.62%
527
2007
- 30,135,000
30,135,000
30,135,000
0.95%
826
2008
- 29,680,000
29,680,000
29,680,000
0.84%
803
2009
- 29,185,000
29,185,000
29,185,000
0.83%
787
Notes: Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the
financial statements.
1 The Moorpark Redevelopment Agency issued $9,860,000 of new tax allocation bonds in 1999,
$11,625,000 in 2001, and $11,695,000 in 2006.
The principal balance on these three bonds as of June 30, 2009 is $5,970,000, $11,540,000 and $11,695,000
respectively.
2 These ratios are calculated using personal income and population for the prior calendar year.
115
233
General bonded debt is debt payable with governmental fund resources and general
obligation bonds recorded in enterprise funds (of which, the City has none).
1 Assessed value has been used because the actual value of taxable property is not
readily available in the State of California.
116
234
CITY OF MOORPARK
Ratio of General Bonded Debt Outstanding
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Outstanding General Bonded Debt
Fiscal Year
General Tax
Percent of
Ended
Obligation Allocation
Assessed
Per
June 30
Bonds Bonds Total
Value 1
Capita
2000
- $ 9,540,000 $ 9,540,000
0.35%
321
2001
- 15,424,000 15,424,000
0.51%
480
2002
- 20,465,000 20,465,000
0.64%
606
2003
- 20,100,000 20,100,000
0.56%
582
2004
- 19,705,000 19,705,000
0.51%
564
2005
- 19,300,000 19,300,000
0.47%
537
2006
- 18,880,000 18,880,000
0.40%
527
2007
- 30,135,000 30,135,000
0.58%
826
2008
- 29,680,000 29,680,000
0.52%
803
2009
- 29,185,000 29,185,000
0.50%
787
General bonded debt is debt payable with governmental fund resources and general
obligation bonds recorded in enterprise funds (of which, the City has none).
1 Assessed value has been used because the actual value of taxable property is not
readily available in the State of California.
116
234
CITY OF MOORPARK
Direct and Overlapping Debt
June 30, 2009
City Assessed Valuation 2008 -09
Redevelopment Agency Incremental Valuation
Adjusted Assessed Valuation
Direct and Overlapping Tax and Assessment Debt:
Metropolitan Water District
Ventura Community College District
Conejo Valley Unified School District
Moorpark Unified School District
City of Moorpark Community Facilities District No. 97 -1
City of Moorpark Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1
City of Moorpark 1915 Act Bonds
Total Direct and Overlapping Tax & Assessment Debt
Overlapping General Fund Obligation Debt:
Ventura County General Fund Obligations
Ventura County Superintendent of Schools COPS
Moorpark Unified School District COPs
Total Overlapping General Fund Obligation Debt
Combined Total Debt*
Total direct and overlapping debt
Percentage
Applicable
0.230%
4.371%
0.018%
92.240%
100.000%
100.000%
100.000%
4.370%
4.370%
92.240%
Notes:
* Excludes tax and revenue anticipation notes, revenue, mortgage revenue
and tax allocation bonds and non - bonded capital lease obligations.
The direct and overlapping bonded debt above is not the City's or the
Redevelopment Agency's obligation.
Source: California Municipal Statistics, Inc.
117
$ 4,921,181,019
671,128,057
$ 4,250,052,962
Debt as of
6/30/2009
$ 293,425,000
317,212,814
43,060,143
41,615,407
6,310,000
36,965,000
1,525,000
740,113,364
$ 62,125,000
12,740,000
9,050,000
83,915,000
$ 824,028,364
Estimated
Share of
Overlapping
Debt
$ 674,878
13,865,372
7,751
38,386,051
6,310,000
36,965,000
1,525,000
97,734,052
2,714,863
556,738
8,347,720
11,619,321
109,353,372
$ 109,353,372
235
CITY OF MOORPARK
Legal Debt Margin Information
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
2000 2001 2002 2003
Assessed valuation $
2,149,505,500
$ 2,421,104,221 $
2,549,782,519 $
2,823,727,286
Conversion percentage
25%
25%
25%
25%
Adjusted assessed valuation
537,376,375
605,276,055
637,445,630
705,931,822
Debt limit percentage
15%
15%
15%
15%
Debt limit
80,606,456
90,791,408
95,616,844
105,889,773
Total net debt applicable to limit:
General obligation bonds
-
-
-
-
Legal debt margin
80,606,456
90,791,408
95,616,844
105,889,773
Total debt applicable to the limit
as a percentage of debt limit
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
The Government Code 2227 of the State of California provides for a legal debt limit of 15% of gross assessed
valuation. However, this provision was enacted when assessed valuation was based upon 25% of market value.
Effective with the 81 -82 fiscal year, each parcel is now assessed at 100% of market value (as of the most recent
change in ownership for that parcel). The computations shown above reflect a conversion of assessed valuation
date for each fiscal year from the current full valuation perspective to the 25% level that was in effect at the time
that the legal debt margin was enacted by the State of California for local governments located within the state.
Source: City Finance Department
Ventura County Tax Assessor's Office
118
236
CITY OF MOORPARK
Legal Debt Margin Information
Last Ten Fiscal Years - Continued
Fiscal Year
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
$ 2,823,727,286 $ 3,231,418,940 $ 3,721,591,791 $ 4,157,360,033 $ 4,558,597,806 $ 4,700,305,496
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
705,931,822
807,854,735
930,397,948
1,039,340,008
1,139,649,452
1,175,076,374
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
105,889,773
121,178,210
139,559,692
155,901,001
170,947,418
176,261,456
105,889,773 121,178,210 139,559,692 155,901,001 170,947,418 176,261,456
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
119
237
CITY OF MOORPARK
Pledged- Revenue Coverage
Last Nine Fiscal Years
Note: Details regarding Moorpark Redevelopment Agency outstanding debt
can be found in the notes to the financial statements. Operating expenses do
not include interest or depreciation expenses.
120
238
Tax Allocation Bonds
Fiscal Year
Ended
Tax
Debt Service
June 30
Increment
Principal
Interest
Coverage
2001
$ 2,501,624
$ 345,000
$ 420,193
3.27
2002
2,606,388
355,000
408,638
3.41
2003
3,537,293
365,000
989,554
2.61
2004
4,076,183
395,000
976,140
2.97
2005
3,860,624
405,000
959,942
2.83
2006
5,487,272
420,000
944,281
4.02
2007
6,306,385
440,000
1,085,040
4.14
2008
6,858,882
455,000
909,906
5.03
2009
7,010,760
475,000
1,397,922
3.74
Note: Details regarding Moorpark Redevelopment Agency outstanding debt
can be found in the notes to the financial statements. Operating expenses do
not include interest or depreciation expenses.
120
238
CITY OF MOORPARK
Demographic and Economic Statistics
Last Ten Calendar Years
Household Median Unemployment
Calendar Population Income Household Rate
Year (1) (in thousands) Income (2) (3)
2000
29,727
$ 2,177,919
$ 73,264
5.1%
2001
32,150
2,414,272
75,094
5.2%
2002
33,760
2,811,600
83,282
6.8%
2003
34,529
2,978,092
86,249
7.2%
2004
34,933
3,054,507
87,439
6.4%
2005
35,933
3,039,105
84,577
5.4%
2006
35,836
3,050,432
85,122
4.4%
2007
36,480
3,179,341
87,153
4.7%
2008
36,971
3,526,775
95,393
5.7%
2009
37,086
3,508,076
94,593
10.3%
Sources: (1) State Department of Finance or Dave Bobardt
(2) CLRSearch.com
(3) State of California Employment Development Department (data shown
is for the County)
121
239
CITY OF MOORPARK
Principal Employers
Current and Ten Years Ago
Current
1998
"Total Employment" as used above represents the total employment of all employers located
within City limits. The total number of employees within the City limits in 2008 were 17,743 as compared to
total number of employees within the City limits in 1998 were 8,142.
Source: Chamber of Commerce
City - data.com
122
240
Percent of
Percent of
Number of
Total
Number of
Total
Employer
Employees
Employment
Employees
Employment
Kavlico
1,200
6.76%
1,000
12.28%
Moorpark Unified School Dist.
871
4.91%
700
8.60%
Pentair Pool Products
527
2.97%
-
0.00%
Waterpik Tech. (Teledyne)
451
2.54%
300
3.68%
Moorpark College
315
1.78%
500
6.14%
SMTEK International
220
1.24%
-
0.00%
Special Devices, Inc.
190
1.07%
-
0.00%
Axius /Auto Shade
150
0.85%
120
1.47%
Target
150
0.85%
-
0.00%
Boething Tree Farm
145
0.82%
-
0.00%
"Total Employment" as used above represents the total employment of all employers located
within City limits. The total number of employees within the City limits in 2008 were 17,743 as compared to
total number of employees within the City limits in 1998 were 8,142.
Source: Chamber of Commerce
City - data.com
122
240
Public safety 1 34 34 33 30 28 31 31 42 42 38
1 Police and fire services were provided by the County.
Fire =18 and police = 20
Source: City Payroll Office
123
241
CITY OF MOORPARK
Full -time and Part-time City Employees
by Function
Last Nine Fiscal Years
Function
2000
2001
2002 2003 2004 2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
General government
18
20
36 43 33
32
31
30
26
26
Public safety (crossing guards)
8
6
6 6 7
4
7
7
7
6
Public services
21
21
41 38 20
17
17
26
22
22
Parks and recreation
45
42
19 19 42
38
41
49
54
56
Total
92
89
102 106 102
91
96
112
109
110
Public safety 1 34 34 33 30 28 31 31 42 42 38
1 Police and fire services were provided by the County.
Fire =18 and police = 20
Source: City Payroll Office
123
241
CITY OF MOORPARK
Operating Indicators
by Function
Last Ten Fiscal Years
2006
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Police: (A)
1,653
1,890
1,732
1,412
2,890
4,160
Arrests
1,258
1,414
1,235
1,296
1,520
1,388
Parking citations issued
130
143
2,579
2,582
4,285
3,706
Fire: (B)
479
378
265
338
180
210
Number of "prime" emergency calls
1,013
975
1,103
1,179
1,415
1,308
Business Inspections•
417
417
117
117
125
125
Public works: (C)
Street resurfacing (miles)
73.33
-
-
73.33
-
0.10
Parks and recreation: (D)
Number of recreation classes
351
423
386
317
290
364
Number of facility rentals
243
250
184
258
307
491
2006
2007
2008
2009
1,653
1,890
1,732
1,412
2,890
4,160
2,860
3,254
1,329
1,351
1,362
1,100
125
123
130
143
-
30.0
3.8
-
338
479
378
265
338
180
210
186
Prime calls and business inspections are for station X42
• In Novembcr 2001, all busness occapmcies lea tbm 10,000 sq. fct became eligible for self insp lion pmg`am.
Source: City of Moorpark I
(A) Provided by Moorpark P.D.; parking citation data is not available for earlier years
(B) Ventura County Fire Dept; - some data not available for earlier years
(C) Moorpark Public Works Dept; - every six years, the City plans to resurface its streets, 1/3 every other year (total street miles = 220)
(D) Arroyo Vista Recreation Dept.; - recreation classes and room rentals began after the park opened
124
242
CITY OF MOORPARK
Capital Asset Statistics
by Function
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Source: City of Moorpark
Of the streetlights, 2,510 are owned by Edison and 8 are owned by the City
125
243
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Police:
Stations
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
Fire:
Fire stations
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Public works:
Streets (miles)
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
78
79
Streetlights
2,264
2,263
2,269
2,299
2,325
2,347
2497
2510
2518
Traffic signals
15
15
15
16
17
17
17
17
20
20
Parks and recreation:
Parks
14
14
15
15
15
15
16
16
16
17
Community centers
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Source: City of Moorpark
Of the streetlights, 2,510 are owned by Edison and 8 are owned by the City
125
243
Attachment 2
244
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Ahlers:
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark (City) as of and for the
year ended June 30, 2009. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the City for the year ended June 30, 2009, we considered its internal control in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. We noted no matters
involving the internal control and its operations that we consider to be material weaknesses
under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
However, we noted items of less significance which are presented for your consideration.
This letter by its very nature is critical and does not highlight the many positive features of
the City's internal controls. These comments and recommendations are intended to improve
the internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies and are summarized as follows:
(1)
Recreation Revenues
As noted in the prior year, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center (Center) receives revenues
from the various programs operated at the Center. They utilize an automated system to
track the various activities throughout the year. The Department submits the revenues and
cash receipt reports to the Finance Department on a regular basis. As in the prior year's
audit, we noted that there is no independent verification, or monitoring of the recreation
deposits. Although the Finance Department records the revenues submitted by the
Recreation Department and reconciles the deposits to the reports that are provided, there is
no verification that all incoming receipts for recreation activities were, in fact, submitted to
the Finance Department. For example, the automated system assigns receipt numbers to
each transaction at the Center. The receipt numbers are provided on the cash receipt reports
submitted to Finance, but there is no independent monitoring of these receipt numbers
(numerical sequence).
Because of the significance of the recreation receipts each year, and in order to strengthen
controls over cash receipts, we recommend the City establish procedures to provide for
independent verification (or internal audit) of the recreation receipts. For example, the
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 245
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com
Finance Department could perform periodic "audits" to compare the information recorded in
the Recreation Department's automated system with the revenues that were submitted to
Finance, and account for the numerical sequence of receipts submitted to Finance. This
would help to verify that all program revenues have been submitted and deposited
throughout each fiscal year.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will implement an internal audit
program to verify the recreation receipts within the next couple of months.
(2)
Purchasing Policy
As noted in the prior year, in gaining an understanding of the purchasing process, we noted
the City's Municipal Code only gives guidance for purchases of supplies and equipment,
and refers to the Public Contract Code for Public Project procurement policies. The
Municipal Code states that the City Council will establish, by resolution, procedures
governing the purchase of contractual or professional services, but no such resolution has
been developed or adopted. The Finance Department has an informal procedure manual that
includes purchasing policies, but it is not very clear or consistent regarding the procurement
of professional services. Also, other departments do not necessarily have a copy of this
manual to refer to when making purchases.
In addition, the Municipal Code provides thresholds and procedures regarding formal and
informal bids in the purchasing process. Purchases of supplies and equipment of $1,000 to
$15,000 go through the informal bid process while those over $15,000 go through the
formal bid process. During our testing of certain purchases, we noted that, for three
purchases of equipment over the $15,000 threshold, no formal bid documentation could be
provided to us. It appears two of the purchases were made in accordance with the informal
bid process, which requires obtaining at least three verbal or written quotations, and
documenting the quotes (if verbal) in the requisition, or attaching to the requisition (if
written). No documentation regarding bids was provided to us for the third purchase. We
also noted that other purchases of supplies and equipment, which appeared to require
informal bids, did not have any informal bid documentation.
To strengthen internal controls over purchasing and procurements, we recommend that the
City revisit its purchasing policies, along with the informal Finance manual, and determine
what changes can be made to clarify the policies regarding procurement of professional
services and help ensure purchasing policies are consistent throughout the City. We also
recommend that the City take necessary steps to ensure that adequate bidding
documentation is maintained on file for all purchases subject to these requirements. For
purchases that are exempt from the bidding requirements, documentation should be
maintained explaining the reason for exemption. The City's procedures should require
verification of adequate bid documentation prior to purchase approval.
246
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the current purchasing
policies and make suggested improvements with regards to the procurement of
professional services and the establishment of adequate bidding documentation.
(3)
New Accounting Standards
In February 2009, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board ( "GASB ") issued its
Statement No. 54 entitled "Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, " which will significantly change the reporting of fund balances and
governmental fund types. The City will be required to implement this Statement as of the
2010 -11 fiscal year. We recommend the City to take steps to determine how this
Statement will affect the City's financial statement presentation, and what action is
necessary. The City may need to revise its chart of accounts and fund structure to
comply with the new standard.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will research GASB 54 and determine
which new account to establish in order to comply with the statement.
(4)
Fraud Prevention and Detection Program
As noted in the prior year, Management of the City is responsible for designing and
implementing systems and procedures for the prevention and detection of fraud, and for
ensuring a culture and environment that promotes honesty and ethical behavior. Fraud
can range from minor employee theft and unproductive behavior to misappropriation of
assets and fraudulent financial reporting.
The risk of fraud can be reduced through a combination of prevention, deterrence, and
detection measures. However, fraud can be difficult to detect because it often involves
concealment through falsification of documents or collusion among management,
employees, or third parties. Therefore, it is important to place a strong emphasis on fraud
prevention, which may reduce opportunities for fraud to take place, and fraud deterrence,
which could persuade individuals that they should not commit fraud because of the
likelihood of detection and punishment. Moreover, prevention and deterrence measures
are much less costly than the time and expense required for fraud detection and
investigation.
While the City has taken steps to address the risk of fraud in certain areas, such as
segregation of duties and other internal controls, we recommend the City consider taking
a more formal, proactive approach to fraud prevention and deterrence. This would
involve establishing an ongoing program of formally identifying and measuring fraud
risks, taking steps to mitigate identified risks, and implementing and monitoring any
necessary preventive and deterrent measures.
247
For example, although the City provides training regarding ethics to management level
employees, the City may want to establish a more formal training program for all
employees regarding fraud. New employees should be trained at the time of hiring about
the entity's values and its code of conduct. This training should explicitly cover
expectations of all employees regarding (1) their duty to communicate certain matters; (2)
a list of the types of matters, including actual or suspected fraud, to be communicated
along with specific examples; and (3) information on how to communicate those matters.
In addition to the training at the time of hiring, employees should receive refresher
training periodically thereafter.
As mentioned above, management needs to provide information to employees on how to
communicate fraud related matters. Research has shown that the majority of fraud is
detected by fellow employees, and not by outside auditors or internal controls. It is
important for the City to establish and communicate to employees a reporting system that
is appropriate for the City. The City should consider establishing a confidential reporting
mechanism, which may include a combination of internal reporting and an anonymous tip
hotline, not only for employees, but also for vendors and customers of the City.
In summary, the City has established controls over fraud in many areas and, based on our
experience, has set an appropriate "tone at the top" regarding ethical behavior. However,
the City should consider a more formal, proactive approach to preventing fraud. The
above comments do not address all components of a strong antifraud program.
Additional information can be provided to the City's management regarding this issue.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will explore the feasibility of
establishing an anonymous "fraud hotline" for: employees, citizens, vendors and the
business community. The City will research other fraud prevention training programs in
order to train new and existing staff.
Summation
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the assistance
extended us during the course of our audit. If we can be of further assistance, or if you have
any questions regarding our recommendations, please call our office. This letter is intended
solely for the information and use of management and is not intended to be and should not
be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully submitted,
TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
d
Greg W. Fankhanel
Certified Public Accountant
07RSCEAMAN,RAUBLIC A COUNi,INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Ahlers:
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark (City) as of and for the
year ended June 30, 2009. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the City for the year ended June 30, 2009, we considered its internal control in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. We noted no matters
involving the internal control and its operations that we consider to be material weaknesses
under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
However, we noted items of less significance which are presented for your consideration.
This letter by its very nature is critical and does not highlight the many positive features of
the City's internal controls. These comments and recommendations are intended to improve
the internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies and are summarized as follows:
(1)
Recreation Revenues
As noted in the prior year, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center (Center) receives revenues
from the various programs operated at the Center. They utilize an automated system to
track the various activities throughout the year. The Department submits the revenues and
cash receipt reports to the Finance Department on a regular basis. As in the prior year's
audit, we noted that there is no independent verification, or monitoring of the recreation
deposits. Although the Finance Department records the revenues submitted by the
Recreation Department and reconciles the deposits to the reports that are provided, there is
no verification that all incoming receipts for recreation activities were, in fact, submitted to
the Finance Department. For example, the automated system assigns receipt numbers to
each transaction at the Center. The receipt numbers are provided on the cash receipt reports
submitted to Finance, but there is no independent monitoring of these receipt numbers
(numerical sequence).
Because of the significance of the recreation receipts each year, and in order to strengthen
controls over cash receipts, we recommend the City establish procedures to provide for
independent verification (or internal audit) of the recreation receipts. For example, the
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 249
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951 .274.7828 FAX • www.trscpas.com
Finance Department could perform periodic "audits" to compare the information recorded in
the Recreation Department's automated system with the revenues that were submitted to
Finance, and account for the numerical sequence of receipts submitted to Finance. This
would help to verify that all program revenues have been submitted and deposited
throughout each fiscal year.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will implement an internal audit
program to verify the recreation receipts within the next couple of months.
(2)
Purchasing Policy
As noted in the prior year, in gaining an understanding of the purchasing process, we noted
the City's Municipal Code only gives guidance for purchases of supplies and equipment,
and refers to the Public Contract Code for Public Project procurement policies. The
Municipal Code states that the City Council will establish, by resolution, procedures
governing the purchase of contractual or professional services, but no such resolution has
been developed or adopted. The Finance Department has an informal procedure manual that
includes purchasing policies, but it is not very clear or consistent regarding the procurement
of professional services. Also, other departments do not necessarily have a copy of this
manual to refer to when making purchases.
In addition, the Municipal Code provides thresholds and procedures regarding formal and
informal bids in the purchasing process. Purchases of supplies and equipment of $1,000 to
$15,000 go through the informal bid process while those over $15,000 go through the
formal bid process. During our testing of certain purchases, we noted that, for three
purchases of equipment over the $15,000 threshold, no formal bid documentation could be
provided to us. It appears two of the purchases were made in accordance with the informal
bid process, which requires obtaining at least three verbal or written quotations, and
documenting the quotes (if verbal) in the requisition, or attaching to the requisition (if
written). No documentation regarding bids was provided to us for the third purchase. We
also noted that other purchases of supplies and equipment, which appeared to require
informal bids, did not have any informal bid documentation.
To strengthen internal controls over purchasing and procurements, we recommend that the
City revisit its purchasing policies, along with the informal Finance manual, and determine
what changes can be made to clarify the policies regarding procurement of professional
services and help ensure purchasing policies are consistent throughout the City. We also
recommend that the City take necessary steps to ensure that adequate bidding
documentation is maintained on file for all purchases subject to these requirements. For
purchases that are exempt from the bidding requirements, documentation should be
maintained explaining the reason for exemption. The City's procedures should require
verification of adequate bid documentation prior to purchase approval.
250
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the current purchasing
policies and make suggested improvements with regards to the procurement of
professional services and the establishment of adequate bidding documentation.
(3)
New Accounting Standards
In February 2009, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board ( "GASB ") issued its
Statement No. 54 entitled "Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, " which will significantly change the reporting of fund balances and
governmental fund types. The City will be required to implement this Statement as of the
2010 -11 fiscal year. We recommend the City to take steps to determine how this
Statement will affect the City's financial statement presentation, and what action is
necessary. The City may need to revise its chart of accounts and fund structure to
comply with the new standard.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will research GASB 54 and determine
which new account to establish in order to comply with the statement.
(4)
Fraud Prevention and Detection Program
As noted in the prior year, Management of the City is responsible for designing and
implementing systems and procedures for the prevention and detection of fraud, and for
ensuring a culture and environment that promotes honesty and ethical behavior. Fraud
can range from minor employee theft and unproductive behavior to misappropriation of
assets and fraudulent financial reporting.
The risk of fraud can be reduced through a combination of prevention, deterrence, and
detection measures. However, fraud can be difficult to detect because it often involves
concealment through falsification of documents or collusion among management,
employees, or third parties. Therefore, it is important to place a strong emphasis on fraud
prevention, which may reduce opportunities for fraud to take place, and fraud deterrence,
which could persuade individuals that they should not commit fraud because of the
likelihood of detection and punishment. Moreover, prevention and deterrence measures
are much less costly than the time and expense required for fraud detection and
investigation.
While the City has taken steps to address the risk of fraud in certain areas, such as
segregation of duties and other internal controls, we recommend the City consider taking
a more formal, proactive approach to fraud prevention and deterrence. This would
involve establishing an ongoing program of formally identifying and measuring fraud
risks, taking steps to mitigate identified risks, and implementing and monitoring any
necessary preventive and deterrent measures.
251
For example, although the City provides training regarding ethics to management level
employees, the City may want to establish a more formal training program for all
employees regarding fraud. New employees should be trained at the time of hiring about
the entity's values and its code of conduct. This training should explicitly cover
expectations of all employees regarding (1) their duty to communicate certain matters; (2)
a list of the types of matters, including actual or suspected fraud, to be communicated
along with specific examples; and (3) information on how to communicate those matters.
In addition to the training at the time of hiring, employees should receive refresher
training periodically thereafter.
As mentioned above, management needs to provide information to employees on how to
communicate fraud related matters. Research has shown that the majority of fraud is
detected by fellow employees, and not by outside auditors or internal controls. It is
important for the City to establish and communicate to employees a reporting system that
is appropriate for the City. The City should consider establishing a confidential reporting
mechanism, which may include a combination of internal reporting and an anonymous tip
hotline, not only for employees, but also for vendors and customers of the City.
In summary, the City has established controls over fraud in many areas and, based on our
experience, has set an appropriate "tone at the top" regarding ethical behavior. However,
the City should consider a more formal, proactive approach to preventing fraud. The
above comments do not address all components of a strong antifraud program.
Additional information can be provided to the City's management regarding this issue.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will explore the feasibility of
establishing an anonymous "fraud hotline" for: employees, citizens, vendors and the
business community. The City will research other fraud prevention training programs in
order to train new and existing staff.
Summation
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the assistance
extended us during the course of our audit. If we can be of further assistance, or if you have
any questions regarding our recommendations, please call our office. This letter is intended
solely for the information and use of management and is not intended to be and should not
be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully submitted,
TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
"A ",/
Greg W. Fankhanel
Certified Public Accountant
252
07RSC EAMAN, RA I A SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Ahlers:
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark (City) as of and for the
year ended June 30, 2009. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the City for the year ended June 30, 2009, we considered its internal control in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. We noted no matters
involving the internal control and its operations that we consider to be material weaknesses
under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
However, we noted items of less significance which are presented for your consideration.
This letter by its very nature is critical and does not highlight the many positive features of
the City's internal controls. These comments and recommendations are intended to improve
the internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies and are summarized as follows:
(1)
Recreation Revenues
As noted in the prior year, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center (Center) receives revenues
from the various programs operated at the Center. They utilize an automated system to
track the various activities throughout the year. The Department submits the revenues and
cash receipt reports to the Finance Department on a regular basis. As in the prior year's
audit, we noted that there is no independent verification, or monitoring of the recreation
deposits. Although the Finance Department records the revenues submitted by the
Recreation Department and reconciles the deposits to the reports that are provided, there is
no verification that all incoming receipts for recreation activities were, in fact, submitted to
the Finance Department. For example, the automated system assigns receipt numbers to
each transaction at the Center. The receipt numbers are provided on the cash receipt reports
submitted to Finance, but there is no independent monitoring of these receipt numbers
(numerical sequence).
Because of the significance of the recreation receipts each year, and in order to strengthen
controls over cash receipts, we recommend the City establish procedures to provide for
independent verification (or internal audit) of the recreation receipts. For example, the
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 253
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com
Finance Department could perform periodic "audits" to compare the information recorded in
the Recreation Department's automated system with the revenues that were submitted to
Finance, and account for the numerical sequence of receipts submitted to Finance. This
would help to verify that all program revenues have been submitted and deposited
throughout each fiscal year.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will implement an internal audit
program to verify the recreation receipts within the next couple of months.
(2)
Purchasing Policy
As noted in the prior year, in gaining an understanding of the purchasing process, we noted
the City's Municipal Code only gives guidance for purchases of supplies and equipment,
and refers to the Public Contract Code for Public Project procurement policies. The
Municipal Code states that the City Council will establish, by resolution, procedures
governing the purchase of contractual or professional services, but no such resolution has
been developed or adopted. The Finance Department has an informal procedure manual that
includes purchasing policies, but it is not very clear or consistent regarding the procurement
of professional services. Also, other departments do not necessarily have a copy of this
manual to refer to when making purchases.
In addition, the Municipal Code provides thresholds and procedures regarding formal and
informal bids in the purchasing process. Purchases of supplies and equipment of $1,000 to
$15,000 go through the informal bid process while those over $15,000 go through the
formal bid process. During our testing of certain purchases, we noted that, for three
purchases of equipment over the $15,000 threshold, no formal bid documentation could be
provided to us. It appears two of the purchases were made in accordance with the informal
bid process, which requires obtaining at least three verbal or written quotations, and
documenting the quotes (if verbal) in the requisition, or attaching to the requisition (if
written). No documentation regarding bids was provided to us for the third purchase. We
also noted that other purchases of supplies and equipment, which appeared to require
informal bids, did not have any informal bid documentation.
To strengthen internal controls over purchasing and procurements, we recommend that the
City revisit its purchasing policies, along with the informal Finance manual, and determine
what changes can be made to clarify the policies regarding procurement of professional
services and help ensure purchasing policies are consistent throughout the City. We also
recommend that the City take necessary steps to ensure that adequate bidding
documentation is maintained on file for all purchases subject to these requirements. For
purchases that are exempt from the bidding requirements, documentation should be
maintained explaining the reason for exemption. The City's procedures should require
verification of adequate bid documentation prior to purchase approval.
254
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the current purchasing
policies and make suggested improvements with regards to the procurement of
professional services and the establishment of adequate bidding documentation.
(3)
New Accounting Standards
In February 2009, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board ( "GASB ") issued its
Statement No. 54 entitled "Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, " which will significantly change the reporting of fund balances and
governmental fund types. The City will be required to implement this Statement as of the
2010 -11 fiscal year. We recommend the City to take steps to determine how this
Statement will affect the City's financial statement presentation, and what action is
necessary. The City may need to revise its chart of accounts and fund structure to
comply with the new standard.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will research GASB 54 and determine
which new account to establish in order to comply with the statement.
(4)
Fraud Prevention and Detection Program
As noted in the prior year, Management of the City is responsible for designing and
implementing systems and procedures for the prevention and detection of fraud, and for
ensuring a culture and environment that promotes honesty and ethical behavior. Fraud
can range from minor employee theft and unproductive behavior to misappropriation of
assets and fraudulent financial reporting.
The risk of fraud can be reduced through a combination of prevention, deterrence, and
detection measures. However, fraud can be difficult to detect because it often involves
concealment through falsification of documents or collusion among management,
employees, or third parties. Therefore, it is important to place a strong emphasis on fraud
prevention, which may reduce opportunities for fraud to take place, and fraud deterrence,
which could persuade individuals that they should not commit fraud because of the
likelihood of detection and punishment. Moreover, prevention and deterrence measures
are much less costly than the time and expense required for fraud detection and
investigation.
While the City has taken steps to address the risk of fraud in certain areas, such as
segregation of duties and other internal controls, we recommend the City consider taking
a more formal, proactive approach to fraud prevention and deterrence. This would
involve establishing an ongoing program of formally identifying and measuring fraud
risks, taking steps to mitigate identified risks, and implementing and monitoring any
necessary preventive and deterrent measures.
255
For example, although the City provides training regarding ethics to management level
employees, the City may want to establish a more formal training program for all
employees regarding fraud. New employees should be trained at the time of hiring about
the entity's values and its code of conduct. This training should explicitly cover
expectations of all employees regarding (1) their duty to communicate certain matters; (2)
a list of the types of matters, including actual or suspected fraud, to be communicated
along with specific examples; and (3) information on how to communicate those matters.
In addition to the training at the time of hiring, employees should receive refresher
training periodically thereafter.
As mentioned above, management needs to provide information to employees on how to
communicate fraud related matters. Research has shown that the majority of fraud is
detected by fellow employees, and not by outside auditors or internal controls. It is
important for the City to establish and communicate to employees a reporting system that
is appropriate for the City. The City should consider establishing a confidential reporting
mechanism, which may include a combination of internal reporting and an anonymous tip
hotline, not only for employees, but also for vendors and customers of the City.
In summary, the City has established controls over fraud in many areas and, based on our
experience, has set an appropriate "tone at the top" regarding ethical behavior. However,
the City should consider a more formal, proactive approach to preventing fraud. The
above comments do not address all components of a strong antifraud program.
Additional information can be provided to the City's management regarding this issue.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will explore the feasibility of
establishing an anonymous "fraud hotline" for: employees, citizens, vendors and the
business community. The City will research other fraud prevention training programs in
order to train new and existing staff.
Summation
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the assistance
extended us during the course of our audit. If we can be of further assistance, or if you have
any questions regarding our recommendations, please call our office. This letter is intended
solely for the information and use of management and is not intended to be and should not
be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully submitted,
TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
r
"A � ,/
Greg W. Fankhanel
Certified Public Accountant
256
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Ahlers:
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark (City) as of and for the
year ended June 30, 2009. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the City for the year ended June 30, 2009, we considered its internal control in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. We noted no matters
involving the internal control and its operations that we consider to be material weaknesses
under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
However, we noted items of less significance which are presented for your consideration.
This letter by its very nature is critical and does not highlight the many positive features of
the City's internal controls. These comments and recommendations are intended to improve
the internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies and are summarized as follows:
(1)
Recreation Revenues
As noted in the prior year, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center (Center) receives revenues
from the various programs operated at the Center. They utilize an automated system to
track the various activities throughout the year. The Department submits the revenues and
cash receipt reports to the Finance Department on a regular basis. As in the prior year's
audit, we noted that there is no independent verification, or monitoring of the recreation
deposits. Although the Finance Department records the revenues submitted by the
Recreation Department and reconciles the deposits to the reports that are provided, there is
no verification that all incoming receipts for recreation activities were, in fact, submitted to
the Finance Department. For example, the automated system assigns receipt numbers to
each transaction at the Center. The receipt numbers are provided on the cash receipt reports
submitted to Finance, but there is no independent monitoring of these receipt numbers
(numerical sequence).
Because of the significance of the recreation receipts each year, and in order to strengthen
controls over cash receipts, we recommend the City establish procedures to provide for
independent verification (or internal audit) of the recreation receipts. For example, the
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H_ Carrillo, CPA 2 C 7
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com J
Finance Department could perform periodic "audits" to compare the information recorded in
the Recreation Department's automated system with the revenues that were submitted to
Finance, and account for the numerical sequence of receipts submitted to Finance. This
would help to verify that all program revenues have been submitted and deposited
throughout each fiscal year.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will implement an internal audit
program to verify the recreation receipts within the next couple of months.
(2)
Purchasing Policy
As noted in the prior year, in gaining an understanding of the purchasing process, we noted
the City's Municipal Code only gives guidance for purchases of supplies and equipment,
and refers to the Public Contract Code for Public Project procurement policies. The
Municipal Code states that the City Council will establish, by resolution, procedures
governing the purchase of contractual or professional services, but no such resolution has
been developed or adopted. The Finance Department has an informal procedure manual that
includes purchasing policies, but it is not very clear or consistent regarding the procurement
of professional services. Also, other departments do not necessarily have a copy of this
manual to refer to when making purchases.
In addition, the Municipal Code provides thresholds and procedures regarding formal and
informal bids in the purchasing process. Purchases of supplies and equipment of $1,000 to
$15,000 go through the informal bid process while those over $15,000 go through the
formal bid process. During our testing of certain purchases, we noted that, for three
purchases of equipment over the $15,000 threshold, no formal bid documentation could be
provided to us. It appears two of the purchases were made in accordance with the informal
bid process, which requires obtaining at least three verbal or written quotations, and
documenting the quotes (if verbal) in the requisition, or attaching to the requisition (if
written). No documentation regarding bids was provided to us for the third purchase. We
also noted that other purchases of supplies and equipment, which appeared to require
informal bids, did not have any informal bid documentation.
To strengthen internal controls over purchasing and procurements, we recommend that the
City revisit its purchasing policies, along with the informal Finance manual, and determine
what changes can be made to clarify the policies regarding procurement of professional
services and help ensure purchasing policies are consistent throughout the City. We also
recommend that the City take necessary steps to ensure that adequate bidding
documentation is maintained on file for all purchases subject to these requirements. For
purchases that are exempt from the bidding requirements, documentation should be
maintained explaining the reason for exemption. The City's procedures should require
verification of adequate bid documentation prior to purchase approval.
258
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the current purchasing
policies and make suggested improvements with regards to the procurement of
professional services and the establishment of adequate bidding documentation.
(3)
New Accounting Standards
In February 2009, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board ( "GASB ") issued its
Statement No. 54 entitled "Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, " which will significantly change the reporting of fund balances and
governmental fund types. The City will be required to implement this Statement as of the
2010 -11 fiscal year. We recommend the City to take steps to determine how this
Statement will affect the City's fmancial statement presentation, and what action is
necessary. The City may need to revise its chart of accounts and fund structure to
comply with the new standard.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will research GASB 54 and determine
which new account to establish in order to comply with the statement.
(4)
Fraud Prevention and Detection Program
As noted in the prior year, Management of the City is responsible for designing and
implementing systems and procedures for the prevention and detection of fraud, and for
ensuring a culture and environment that promotes honesty and ethical behavior. Fraud
can range from minor employee theft and unproductive behavior to misappropriation of
assets and fraudulent financial reporting.
The risk of fraud can be reduced through a combination of prevention, deterrence, and
detection measures. However, fraud can be difficult to detect because it often involves
concealment through falsification of documents or collusion among management,
employees, or third parties. Therefore, it is important to place a strong emphasis on fraud
prevention, which may reduce opportunities for fraud to take place, and fraud deterrence,
which could persuade individuals that they should not commit fraud because of the
likelihood of detection and punishment. Moreover, prevention and deterrence measures
are much less costly than the time and expense required for fraud detection and
investigation.
While the City has taken steps to address the risk of fraud in certain areas, such as
segregation of duties and other internal controls, we recommend the City consider taking
a more formal, proactive approach to fraud prevention and deterrence. This would
involve establishing an ongoing program of formally identifying and measuring fraud
risks, taking steps to mitigate identified risks, and implementing and monitoring any
necessary preventive and deterrent measures.
259
For example, although the City provides training regarding ethics to management level
employees, the City may want to establish a more formal training program for all
employees regarding fraud. New employees should be trained at the time of hiring about
the entity's values and its code of conduct. This training should explicitly cover
expectations of all employees regarding (1) their duty to communicate certain matters; (2)
a list of the types of matters, including actual or suspected fraud, to be communicated
along with specific examples; and (3) information on how to communicate those matters.
In addition to the training at the time of hiring, employees should receive refresher
training periodically thereafter.
As mentioned above, management needs to provide information to employees on how to
communicate fraud related matters. Research has shown that the majority of fraud is
detected by fellow employees, and not by outside auditors or internal controls. It is
important for the City to establish and communicate to employees a reporting system that
is appropriate for the City. The City should consider establishing a confidential reporting
mechanism, which may include a combination of internal reporting and an anonymous tip
hotline, not only for employees, but also for vendors and customers of the City.
In summary, the City has established controls over fraud in many areas and, based on our
experience, has set an appropriate "tone at the top" regarding ethical behavior. However,
the City should consider a more formal, proactive approach to preventing fraud. The
above comments do not address all components of a strong antifraud program.
Additional information can be provided to the City's management regarding this issue.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will explore the feasibility of
establishing an anonymous "fraud hotline" for: employees, citizens, vendors and the
business community. The City will research other fraud prevention training programs in
order to train new and existing staff.
Summation
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the assistance
extended us during the course of our audit. If we can be of further assistance, or if you have
any questions regarding our recommendations, please call our office. This letter is intended
solely for the information and use of management and is not intended to be and should not
be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully submitted,
TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
d
Greg W. Fankhanel
Certified Public Accountant
260
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Ahlers:
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark (City) as of and for the
year ended June 30, 2009. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the City for the year ended June 30, 2009, we considered its internal control in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. We noted no matters
involving the internal control and its operations that we consider to be material weaknesses
under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
However, we noted items of less significance which are presented for your consideration.
This letter by its very nature is critical and does not highlight the many positive features of
the City's internal controls. These comments and recommendations are intended to improve
the internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies and are summarized as follows:
(1)
Recreation Revenues
As noted in the prior year, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center (Center) receives revenues
from the various programs operated at the Center. They utilize an automated system to
track the various activities throughout the year. The Department submits the revenues and
cash receipt reports to the Finance Department on a regular basis. As in the prior year's
audit, we noted that there is no independent verification, or monitoring of the recreation
deposits. Although the Finance Department records the revenues submitted by the
Recreation Department and reconciles the deposits to the reports that are provided, there is
no verification that all incoming receipts for recreation activities were, in fact, submitted to
the Finance Department. For example, the automated system assigns receipt numbers to
each transaction at the Center. The receipt numbers are provided on the cash receipt reports
submitted to Finance, but there is no independent monitoring of these receipt numbers
(numerical sequence).
Because of the significance of the recreation receipts each year, and in order to strengthen
controls over cash receipts, we recommend the City establish procedures to provide for
independent verification (or internal audit) of the recreation receipts. For example, the
Richard A. Teaman, cPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA • Javier H. Carrillo, cPA `�
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951 .274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com V
Finance Department could perform periodic "audits" to compare the information recorded in
the Recreation Department's automated system with the revenues that were submitted to
Finance, and account for the numerical sequence of receipts submitted to Finance. This
would help to verify that all program revenues have been submitted and deposited
throughout each fiscal year.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will implement an internal audit
program to verify the recreation receipts within the next couple of months.
(2)
Purchasing Policy
As noted in the prior year, in gaining an understanding of the purchasing process, we noted
the City's Municipal Code only gives guidance for purchases of supplies and equipment,
and refers to the Public Contract Code for Public Project procurement policies. The
Municipal Code states that the City Council will establish, by resolution, procedures
governing the purchase of contractual or professional services, but no such resolution has
been developed or adopted. The Finance Department has an informal procedure manual that
includes purchasing policies, but it is not very clear or consistent regarding the procurement
of professional services. Also, other departments do not necessarily have a copy of this
manual to refer to when making purchases.
In addition, the Municipal Code provides thresholds and procedures regarding formal and
informal bids in the purchasing process. Purchases of supplies and equipment of $1,000 to
$15,000 go through the informal bid process while those over $15,000 go through the
formal bid process. During our testing of certain purchases, we noted that, for three
purchases of equipment over the $15,000 threshold, no formal bid documentation could be
provided to us. It appears two of the purchases were made in accordance with the informal
bid process, which requires obtaining at least three verbal or written quotations, and
documenting the quotes (if verbal) in the requisition, or attaching to the requisition (if
written). No documentation regarding bids was provided to us for the third purchase. We
also noted that other purchases of supplies and equipment, which appeared to require
informal bids, did not have any informal bid documentation.
To strengthen internal controls over purchasing and procurements, we recommend that the
City revisit its purchasing policies, along with the informal Finance manual, and determine
what changes can be made to clarify the policies regarding procurement of professional
services and help ensure purchasing policies are consistent throughout the City. We also
recommend that the City take necessary steps to ensure that adequate bidding
documentation is maintained on file for all purchases subject to these requirements. For
purchases that are exempt from the bidding requirements, documentation should be
maintained explaining the reason for exemption. The City's procedures should require
verification of adequate bid documentation prior to purchase approval.
262
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the current purchasing
policies and make suggested improvements with regards to the procurement of
professional services and the establishment of adequate bidding documentation.
(3)
New Accounting Standards
In February 2009, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board ( "GASB ") issued its
Statement No. 54 entitled "Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, " which will significantly change the reporting of fund balances and
governmental fund types. The City will be required to implement this Statement as of the
2010 -11 fiscal year. We recommend the City to take steps to determine how this
Statement will affect the City's financial statement presentation, and what action is
necessary. The City may need to revise its chart of accounts and fund structure to
comply with the new standard.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will research GASB 54 and determine
which new account to establish in order to comply with the statement.
(4)
Fraud Prevention and Detection Program
As noted in the prior year, Management of the City is responsible for designing and
implementing systems and procedures for the prevention and detection of fraud, and for
ensuring a culture and environment that promotes honesty and ethical behavior. Fraud
can range from minor employee theft and unproductive behavior to misappropriation of
assets and fraudulent financial reporting.
The risk of fraud can be reduced through a combination of prevention, deterrence, and
detection measures. However, fraud can be difficult to detect because it often involves
concealment through falsification of documents or collusion among management,
employees, or third parties. Therefore, it is important to place a strong emphasis on fraud
prevention, which may reduce opportunities for fraud to take place, and fraud deterrence,
which could persuade individuals that they should not commit fraud because of the
likelihood of detection and punishment. Moreover, prevention and deterrence measures
are much less costly than the time and expense required for fraud detection and
investigation.
While the City has taken steps to address the risk of fraud in certain areas, such as
segregation of duties and other internal controls, we recommend the City consider taking
a more formal, proactive approach to fraud prevention and deterrence. This would
involve establishing an ongoing program of formally identifying and measuring fraud
risks, taking steps to mitigate identified risks, and implementing and monitoring any
necessary preventive and deterrent measures.
263
For example, although the City provides training regarding ethics to management level
employees, the City may want to establish a more formal training program for all
employees regarding fraud. New employees should be trained at the time of hiring about
the entity's values and its code of conduct. This training should explicitly cover
expectations of all employees regarding (1) their duty to communicate certain matters; (2)
a list of the types of matters, including actual or suspected fraud, to be communicated
along with specific examples; and (3) information on how to communicate those matters.
In addition to the training at the time of hiring, employees should receive refresher
training periodically thereafter.
As mentioned above, management needs to provide information to employees on how to
communicate fraud related matters. Research has shown that the majority of fraud is
detected by fellow employees, and not by outside auditors or internal controls. It is
important for the City to establish and communicate to employees a reporting system that
is appropriate for the City. The City should consider establishing a confidential reporting
mechanism, which may include a combination of internal reporting and an anonymous tip
hotline, not only for employees, but also for vendors and customers of the City.
In summary, the City has established controls over fraud in many areas and, based on our
experience, has set an appropriate "tone at the top" regarding ethical behavior. However,
the City should consider a more formal, proactive approach to preventing fraud. The
above comments do not address all components of a strong antifraud program.
Additional information can be provided to the City's management regarding this issue.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will explore the feasibility of
establishing an anonymous "fraud hotline" for: employees, citizens, vendors and the
business community. The City will research other fraud prevention training programs in
order to train new and existing staff.
Summation
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the assistance
extended us during the course of our audit. If we can be of further assistance, or if you have
any questions regarding our recommendations, please call our office. This letter is intended
solely for the information and use of management and is not intended to be and should not
be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully submitted,
TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
Greg W. Fankhanel
Certified Public Accountant
N
RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Ahlers:
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark (City) as of and for the
year ended June 30, 2009. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the City for the year ended June 30, 2009, we considered its internal control in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. We noted no matters
involving the internal control and its operations that we consider to be material weaknesses
under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
However, we noted items of less significance which are presented for your consideration.
This letter by its very nature is critical and does not highlight the many positive features of
the City's internal controls. These comments and recommendations are intended to improve
the internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies and are summarized as follows:
(1)
Recreation Revenues
As noted in the prior year, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center (Center) receives revenues
from the various programs operated at the Center. They utilize an automated system to
track the various activities throughout the year. The Department submits the revenues and
cash receipt reports to the Finance Department on a regular basis. As in the prior year's
audit, we noted that there is no independent verification, or monitoring of the recreation
deposits. Although the Finance Department records the revenues submitted by the
Recreation Department and reconciles the deposits to the reports that are provided, there is
no verification that all incoming receipts for recreation activities were, in fact, submitted to
the Finance Department. For example, the automated system assigns receipt numbers to
each transaction at the Center. The receipt numbers are provided on the cash receipt reports
submitted to Finance, but there is no independent monitoring of these receipt numbers
(numerical sequence).
Because of the significance of the recreation receipts each year, and in order to strengthen
controls over cash receipts, we recommend the City establish procedures to provide for
independent verification (or internal audit) of the recreation receipts. For example, the
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 265
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951 .274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com
Finance Department could perform periodic "audits" to compare the information recorded in
the Recreation Department's automated system with the revenues that were submitted to
Finance, and account for the numerical sequence of receipts submitted to Finance. This
would help to verify that all program revenues have been submitted and deposited
throughout each fiscal year.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will implement an internal audit
program to verify the recreation receipts within the next couple of months.
(2)
Purchasing Policy
As noted in the prior year, in gaining an understanding of the purchasing process, we noted
the City's Municipal Code only gives guidance for purchases of supplies and equipment,
and refers to the Public Contract Code for Public Project procurement policies. The
Municipal Code states that the City Council will establish, by resolution, procedures
governing the purchase of contractual or professional services, but no such resolution has
been developed or adopted. The Finance Department has an informal procedure manual that
includes purchasing policies, but it is not very clear or consistent regarding the procurement
of professional services. Also, other departments do not necessarily have a copy of this
manual to refer to when making purchases.
In addition, the Municipal Code provides thresholds and procedures regarding formal and
informal bids in the purchasing process. Purchases of supplies and equipment of $1,000 to
$15,000 go through the informal bid process while those over $15,000 go through the
formal bid process. During our testing of certain purchases, we noted that, for three
purchases of equipment over the $15,000 threshold, no formal bid documentation could be
provided to us. It appears two of the purchases were made in accordance with the informal
bid process, which requires obtaining at least three verbal or written quotations, and
documenting the quotes (if verbal) in the requisition, or attaching to the requisition (if
written). No documentation regarding bids was provided to us for the third purchase. We
also noted that other purchases of supplies and equipment, which appeared to require
informal bids, did not have any informal bid documentation.
To strengthen internal controls over purchasing and procurements, we recommend that the
City revisit its purchasing policies, along with the informal Finance manual, and determine
what changes can be made to clarify the policies regarding procurement of professional
services and help ensure purchasing policies are consistent throughout the City. We also
recommend that the City take necessary steps to ensure that adequate bidding
documentation is maintained on file for all purchases subject to these requirements. For
purchases that are exempt from the bidding requirements, documentation should be
maintained explaining the reason for exemption. The City's procedures should require
verification of adequate bid documentation prior to purchase approval.
N..
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the current purchasing
policies and make suggested improvements with regards to the procurement of
professional services and the establishment of adequate bidding documentation.
(3)
New Accounting Standards
In February 2009, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board ( "GASB ") issued its
Statement No. 54 entitled "Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, " which will significantly change the reporting of fund balances and
governmental fund types. The City will be required to implement this Statement as of the
2010 -11 fiscal year. We recommend the City to take steps to determine how this
Statement will affect the City's financial statement presentation, and what action is
necessary. The City may need to revise its chart of accounts and fund structure to
comply with the new standard.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will research GASB 54 and determine
which new account to establish in order to comply with the statement.
(4)
Fraud Prevention and Detection Program
As noted in the prior year, Management of the City is responsible for designing and
implementing systems and procedures for the prevention and detection of fraud, and for
ensuring a culture and environment that promotes honesty and ethical behavior. Fraud
can range from minor employee theft and unproductive behavior to misappropriation of
assets and fraudulent financial reporting.
The risk of fraud can be reduced through a combination of prevention, deterrence, and
detection measures. However, fraud can be difficult to detect because it often involves
concealment through falsification of documents or collusion among management,
employees, or third parties. Therefore, it is important to place a strong emphasis on fraud
prevention, which may reduce opportunities for fraud to take place, and fraud deterrence,
which could persuade individuals that they should not commit fraud because of the
likelihood of detection and punishment. Moreover, prevention and deterrence measures
are much less costly than the time and expense required for fraud detection and
investigation.
While the City has taken steps to address the risk of fraud in certain areas, such as
segregation of duties and other internal controls, we recommend the City consider taking
a more formal, proactive approach to fraud prevention and deterrence. This would
involve establishing an ongoing program of formally identifying and measuring fraud
risks, taking steps to mitigate identified risks, and implementing and monitoring any
necessary preventive and deterrent measures.
267
For example, although the City provides training regarding ethics to management level
employees, the City may want to establish a more formal training program for all
employees regarding fraud. New employees should be trained at the time of hiring about
the entity's values and its code of conduct. This training should explicitly cover
expectations of all employees regarding (1) their duty to communicate certain matters; (2)
a list of the types of matters, including actual or suspected fraud, to be communicated
along with specific examples; and (3) information on how to communicate those matters.
In addition to the training at the time of hiring, employees should receive refresher
training periodically thereafter.
As mentioned above, management needs to provide information to employees on how to
communicate fraud related matters. Research has shown that the majority of fraud is
detected by fellow employees, and not by outside auditors or internal controls. It is
important for the City to establish and communicate to employees a reporting system that
is appropriate for the City. The City should consider establishing a confidential reporting
mechanism, which may include a combination of internal reporting and an anonymous tip
hotline, not only for employees, but also for vendors and customers of the City.
In summary, the City has established controls over fraud in many areas and, based on our
experience, has set an appropriate "tone at the top" regarding ethical behavior. However,
the City should consider a more formal, proactive approach to preventing fraud. The
above comments do not address all components of a strong antifraud program.
Additional information can be provided to the City's management regarding this issue.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will explore the feasibility of
establishing an anonymous "fraud hotline" for: employees, citizens, vendors and the
business community. The City will research other fraud prevention training programs in
order to train new and existing staff.
Summation
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the assistance
extended us during the course of our audit. If we can be of further assistance, or if you have
any questions regarding our recommendations, please call our office. This letter is intended
solely for the information and use of management and is not intended to be and should not
be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully submitted,
TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
Greg W. Fankhanel
Certified Public Accountant
am
07RS C A EAMAN. R4MIREZ INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Ahlers:
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark (City) as of and for the
year ended June 30, 2009. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the City for the year ended June 30, 2009, we considered its internal control in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. We noted no matters
involving the internal control and its operations that we consider to be material weaknesses
under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
However, we noted items of less significance which are presented for your consideration.
This letter by its very nature is critical and does not highlight the many positive features of
the City's internal controls. These comments and recommendations are intended to improve
the internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies and are summarized as follows:
(1)
Recreation Revenues
As noted, in the prior year, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center (Center) receives revenues
from the various programs operated at the Center. They utilize an automated system to
track the various activities throughout the year. The Department submits the revenues and
cash receipt reports to the Finance Department on a regular basis. As in the prior year's
audit, we noted that there is no independent verification, or monitoring of the recreation
deposits. Although the Finance Department records the revenues submitted by the
Recreation Department and reconciles the deposits to the reports that are provided, there is
no verification that all incoming receipts for recreation activities were, in fact, submitted to
the Finance Department. For example, the automated system assigns receipt numbers to
each transaction at the Center. The receipt numbers are provided on the cash receipt reports
submitted to Finance, but there is no independent monitoring of these receipt numbers
(numerical sequence).
Because of the significance of the recreation receipts each year, and in order to strengthen
controls over cash receipts, we recommend the City establish procedures to provide for
independent verification (or internal audit) of the recreation receipts. For example, the
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 269
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com
,LLB � ,.
Finance Department could perform periodic "audits" to compare the information recorded in
the Recreation Department's automated system with the revenues that were submitted to
Finance, and account for the numerical sequence of receipts submitted to Finance. This
would help to verify that all program revenues have been submitted and deposited
throughout each fiscal year.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will implement an internal audit
program to verify the recreation receipts within the next couple of months.
(2) -
Purchasine Policy
As noted in the prior year, in gaining an understanding of the purchasing process, we noted
the City's Municipal Code only gives guidance for purchases of supplies and equipment,
and refers to the Public Contract Code for Public Project procurement policies. The
Municipal Code states that the City Council will establish, by resolution, procedures
governing the purchase of contractual or professional services, but no such resolution has
been developed or adopted. The Finance Department has an informal procedure manual that
includes purchasing policies, but it is not very clear or consistent regarding the procurement
of professional services. Also, other departments do not necessarily have a copy of this
manual to refer to when making purchases.
In addition, the Municipal Code provides thresholds and procedures regarding formal and
informal bids in the purchasing process. Purchases of supplies and equipment of $1,000 to
$15,000 go through the informal bid process while those over $15,000 go through the
formal bid process. During our testing of certain purchases, we noted that, for three
purchases of equipment over the $15,000 threshold, no formal bid documentation could be
provided to us. It appears two of the purchases were made in accordance with the informal
bid process, which requires obtaining at least three verbal or written quotations, and
documenting the quotes (if verbal) in the requisition, or attaching to the requisition (if
written). No documentation regarding bids was provided to us for the third purchase. We
also noted that other purchases of supplies and equipment, which appeared to require
informal bids, did not have any informal bid documentation.
To strengthen internal controls over purchasing and procurements, we recommend that the
City revisit its purchasing policies, along with the informal Finance manual, and determine
what changes can be made to clarify the policies regarding procurement of professional
services and help ensure purchasing policies are consistent throughout the City. We also
recommend that the City take necessary steps to ensure that adequate bidding
documentation is maintained on file for all purchases subject to these requirements. For
purchases that are exempt from the bidding requirements, documentation should be
maintained explaining the reason for exemption. The City's procedures should require
verification of adequate bid documentation prior to purchase approval.
270
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the current purchasing
policies and make suggested improvements with regards to the procurement of
professional services and the establishment of adequate bidding documentation.
(3)
New Accounting Standards
In February 2009, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board ( "GASB ") issued its
Statement No. 54 entitled "Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, " which will significantly change the reporting of fund balances and
governmental fund types. The City will be required to implement this Statement as of the
2010 -11 fiscal year. We recommend the City to take steps to determine how this
Statement will affect the City's financial statement presentation, and what action is
necessary. The City may need to revise its chart of accounts and fund structure to
comply with the new standard.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will research GASB 54 and determine
which new account to establish in order to comply with the statement.
(4)
Fraud Prevention and Detection Program
As noted in the prior year, Management of the City is responsible for designing and
implementing systems and procedures for the prevention and detection of fraud, and for
ensuring a culture and environment that promotes honesty and ethical behavior. Fraud
can range from minor employee theft and unproductive behavior to misappropriation of
assets and fraudulent financial reporting.
The risk of fraud can be reduced through a combination of prevention, deterrence, and
detection measures. However, fraud can be difficult to detect because it often involves
concealment through falsification of documents or collusion among management,
employees, or third parties. Therefore, it is important to place a strong emphasis on fraud
prevention, which may reduce opportunities for fraud to take place, and fraud deterrence,
which could persuade individuals that they should not commit fraud because of the
likelihood of detection and punishment. Moreover, prevention and deterrence measures
are much less costly than the time and expense required for fraud detection and
investigation.
While the City has taken steps to address the risk of fraud in certain areas, such as
segregation of duties and other internal controls, we recommend the City consider taking
a more formal, proactive approach to fraud prevention and deterrence. This would
involve establishing an ongoing program of formally identifying and measuring fraud
risks, taking steps to mitigate identified risks, and implementing and monitoring any
necessary preventive and deterrent measures.
271
For example, although the City provides training regarding ethics to management level
employees, the City may want to establish a more formal training program for all
employees regarding fraud. New employees should be trained at the time of hiring about
the entity's values and its code of conduct. This training should explicitly cover
expectations of all employees regarding (1) their duty to communicate certain matters; (2)
a list of the types of matters, including actual or suspected fraud, to be communicated
along with specific examples; and (3) information on how to communicate those matters.
In addition to the training at the time of hiring, employees should receive refresher
training periodically thereafter.
As mentioned above, management needs to provide information to employees on how to
communicate fraud related matters. Research has shown that the majority of fraud is
detected by fellow employees, and not by outside auditors or internal controls. It is
important for the City to establish and communicate to employees a reporting system that
is appropriate for the City. The City should consider establishing a confidential reporting
mechanism, which may include a combination of internal reporting and an anonymous tip
hotline, not only for employees, but also for vendors and customers of the City.
In summary, the City has established controls over fraud in many areas and, based on our
experience, has set an appropriate "tone at the top" regarding ethical behavior. However,
the City should consider a more formal, proactive approach to preventing fraud. The
above comments do not address all components of a strong antifraud program.
Additional information can be provided to the City's management regarding this issue.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will explore the feasibility of
establishing an anonymous "fraud hotline" for: employees, citizens, vendors and the
business community. The City will research other fraud prevention training programs in
order to train new and existing staff.
Summation
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the assistance
extended us during the course of our audit. If we can be of further assistance, or if you have
any questions regarding our recommendations, please call our office. This letter is intended
solely for the information and use of management and is not intended to be and should not
be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully submitted,
TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
d
Greg W. Fankhanel
Certified Public Accountant
272
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
Ron Ahlers, Finance Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Ahlers:
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark (City) as of and for the
year ended June 30, 2009. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the City for the year ended June 30, 2009, we considered its internal control in order to
determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control. We noted no matters
involving the internal control and its operations that we consider to be material weaknesses
under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
However, we noted items of less significance which are presented for your consideration.
This letter by its very nature is critical and does not highlight the many positive features of
the City's internal controls. These comments and recommendations are intended to improve
the internal controls or result in other operating efficiencies and are summarized as follows:
(1)
Recreation Revenues
As noted in the prior year, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center (Center) receives revenues
from the various programs operated at the Center. They utilize an automated system to
track the various activities throughout the year. The Department submits the revenues and
cash receipt reports to the Finance Department on a regular basis. As in the prior year's
audit, we noted that there is no independent verification, or monitoring of the recreation
deposits. Although the Finance Department records the revenues submitted by the
Recreation Department and reconciles the deposits to the reports that are provided, there is
no verification that all incoming receipts for recreation activities were, in fact, submitted to
the Finance Department. For example, the automated system assigns receipt numbers to
each transaction at the Center. The receipt numbers are provided on the cash receipt reports
submitted to Finance, but there is no independent monitoring of these receipt numbers
(numerical sequence).
Because of the significance of the recreation receipts each year, and in order to strengthen
controls over cash receipts, we recommend the City establish procedures to provide for
independent verification (or internal audit) of the recreation receipts. For example, the
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 2 7
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com
Finance Department could perform periodic "audits" to compare the information recorded in
the Recreation Department's automated system with the revenues that were submitted to
Finance, and account for the numerical sequence of receipts submitted to Finance. This
would help to verify that all program revenues have been submitted and deposited
throughout each fiscal year.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will implement an internal audit
program to verify the recreation receipts within the next couple of months.
(2)
Purchasing Policy
As noted in the prior year, in gaining an understanding of the purchasing process, we noted
the City's Municipal Code only gives guidance for purchases of supplies and equipment,
and refers to the Public Contract Code for Public Project procurement policies. The
Municipal Code states that the City Council will establish, by resolution, procedures
governing the purchase of contractual or professional services, but no such resolution has
been developed or adopted. The Finance Department has an informal procedure manual that
includes purchasing policies, but it is not very clear or consistent regarding the procurement
of professional services. Also, other departments do not necessarily have a copy of this
manual to refer to when making purchases.
In addition, the Municipal Code provides thresholds and procedures regarding formal and
informal bids in the purchasing process. Purchases of supplies and equipment of $1,000 to
$15,000 go through the informal bid process while those over $15,000 go through the
formal bid process. During our testing of certain purchases, we noted that, for three
purchases of equipment over the $15,000 threshold, no formal bid documentation could be
provided to us. It appears two of the purchases were made in accordance with the informal
bid process, which requires obtaining at least three verbal or written quotations, and
documenting the quotes (if verbal) in the requisition, or attaching to the requisition (if
written). No documentation regarding bids was provided to us for the third purchase. We
also noted that other purchases of supplies and equipment, which appeared to require
informal bids, did not have any informal bid documentation.
To strengthen internal controls over purchasing and procurements, we recommend that the
City revisit its purchasing policies, along with the informal Finance manual, and determine
what changes can be made to clarify the policies regarding procurement of professional
services and help ensure purchasing policies are consistent throughout the City. We also
recommend that the City take necessary steps to ensure that adequate bidding
documentation is maintained on file for all purchases subject to these requirements. For
purchases that are exempt from the bidding requirements, documentation should be
maintained explaining the reason for exemption. The City's procedures should require
verification of adequate bid documentation prior to purchase approval.
274
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the current purchasing
policies and make suggested improvements with regards to the procurement of
professional services and the establishment of adequate bidding documentation.
(3)
New Accounting Standards
In February 2009, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board ( "GASB ") issued its
Statement No. 54 entitled "Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, " which will significantly change the reporting of fund balances and
governmental fund types. The City will be required to implement this Statement as of the
2010 -11 fiscal year. We recommend the City to take steps to determine how this
Statement will affect the City's financial statement presentation, and what action is
necessary. The City may need to revise its chart of accounts and fund structure to
comply with the new standard.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will research GASB 54 and determine
which new account to establish in order to comply with the statement.
(4)
Fraud Prevention and Detection Program
As noted in the prior year, Management of the City is responsible for designing and
implementing systems and procedures for the prevention and detection of fraud, and for
ensuring a culture and environment that promotes honesty and ethical behavior. Fraud
can range from minor employee theft and unproductive behavior to misappropriation of
assets and fraudulent financial reporting.
The risk of fraud can be reduced through a combination of prevention, deterrence, and
detection measures. However, fraud can be difficult to detect because it often involves
concealment through falsification of documents or collusion among management,
employees, or third parties. Therefore, it is important to place a strong emphasis on fraud
prevention, which may reduce opportunities for fraud to take place, and fraud deterrence,
which could persuade individuals that they should not commit fraud because of the
likelihood of detection and punishment. Moreover, prevention and deterrence measures
are much less costly than the time and expense required for fraud detection and
investigation.
While the City has taken steps to address the risk of fraud in certain areas, such as
segregation of duties and other internal controls, we recommend the City consider taking
a more formal, proactive approach to fraud prevention and deterrence. This would
involve establishing an ongoing program of formally identifying and measuring fraud
risks, taking steps to mitigate identified risks, and implementing and monitoring any
necessary preventive and deterrent measures.
275
For example, although the City provides training regarding ethics to management level
employees, the City may want to establish a more formal training program for all
employees regarding fraud. New employees should be trained at the time of hiring about
the entity's values and its code of conduct. This training should explicitly cover
expectations of all employees regarding (1) their duty to communicate certain matters; (2)
a list of the types of matters, including actual or suspected fraud, to be communicated
along with specific examples; and (3) information on how to communicate those matters.
In addition to the training at the time of hiring, employees should receive refresher
training periodically thereafter.
As mentioned above, management needs to provide information to employees on how to
communicate fraud related matters. Research has shown that the majority of fraud is
detected by fellow employees, and not by outside auditors or internal controls. It is
important for the City to establish and communicate to employees a reporting system that
is appropriate for the City. The City should consider establishing a confidential reporting
mechanism, which may include a combination of internal reporting and an anonymous tip
hotline, not only for employees, but also for vendors and customers of the City.
In summary, the City has established controls over fraud in many areas and, based on our
experience, has set an appropriate "tone at the top" regarding ethical behavior. However,
the City should consider a more formal, proactive approach to preventing fraud. The
above comments do not address all components of a strong antifraud program.
Additional information can be provided to the City's management regarding this issue.
Management Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation and will explore the feasibility of
establishing an anonymous "fraud hotline" for: employees, citizens, vendors and the
business community. The City will research other fraud prevention training programs in
order to train new and existing staff.
Summation
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the assistance
extended us during the course of our audit. If we can be of further assistance, or if you have
any questions regarding our recommendations, please call our office. This letter is intended
solely for the information and use of management and is not intended to be and should not
be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully submitted,
TEAMAN, RAM REZ & SMITH, INC.
W
Greg W. Fankhanel
Certified Public Accountant
276
Attachment 3
277
70RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed
in Accordance with Government A uMng Standards
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark, California (City) as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards
applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City's internal control over financial reporting.
A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of perfonning their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements
on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies,
that adversely affects the entity's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data
reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not
be prevented or detected by the entity's internal control.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in
more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented
or detected by the entity's internal control.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the
first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that
might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal
control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Richard A. Tearnan, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA • Javier H. Carrillo, GPA 278
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 s 951.274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination
of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests
disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government
Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to Management of the City of Moorpark in a separate letter dated
December 4, 2009.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, federal awarding
agencies and pass - through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.
December 4, 2009
279
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed
in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark, California (City) as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards
applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City's internal control over financial reporting.
A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements
on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies,
that adversely affects the entity's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data
reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not
be prevented or detected by the entity's internal control.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in
more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented
or detected by the entity's internal control.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the
first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that
might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal
control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Grey W. Fankhanel, CPA o David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, ci'A O
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 s 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination
of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests
disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government
Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to Management of the City of Moorpark in a separate letter dated
December 4, 2009.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, federal awarding
agencies and pass - through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.
December 4, 2009
281
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMFFH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed
in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark, California (City) as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards
applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting,
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City's internal control over financial reporting.
A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements
on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies,
that adversely affects the entity's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data
reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not
be prevented or detected by the entity's internal control.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in
more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented
or detected by the entity's internal control.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the
first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that
might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal
control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Richard A. Tearroan, cPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA s Javier H. Carrillo, cr'A o
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 a 951.274.9500 • 951 .274.7828 FAX 0 www.trscpas.com O
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination
of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests
disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government
Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to Management of the City of Moorpark in a separate letter dated
December 4, 2009.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, federal awarding
agencies and pass - through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.
December 4, 2009
283
RS TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
07CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed
in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark, California (City) as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards
applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City's internal control over financial reporting.
A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements
on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies,
that adversely affects the entity's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data
reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not
be prevented or detected by the entity's internal control.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in
more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented
or detected by the entity's internal control.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the
first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that
might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal
control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA s Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA Y Javier H. Carrillo, co- =A o ^
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 s 951 .274.7828 FAX • www.trscpas.com 8 4
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination
of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests
disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government
Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to Management of the City of Moorpark in a separate letter dated
December 4, 2009.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, federal awarding
agencies and pass - through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.
December 4, 2009
285
RS TEAMA.N, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
07CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed
in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark, California (City) as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards
applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City's internal control over financial reporting.
A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements
on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies,
that adversely affects the entity's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data
reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not
be prevented or detected by the entity's internal control.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in
more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented
or detected by the entity's internal control.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the
first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that
might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal
control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA ® Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, Ci'A o
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 s 951.274.9500• 951.274.7828 FA%• www.trscpas.com O V
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination
of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests
disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government
Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to Management of the City of Moorpark in a separate letter dated
December 4, 2009.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, federal awarding
agencies and pass - through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.
December 4, 2009
287
07RSTEAMAN, R I A SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed
in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark, California (City) as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards
applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City's internal control over financial reporting.
A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements
on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies,
that adversely affects the entity's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data
reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not
be prevented or detected by the entity's internal control.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in
more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented
or detected by the entity's internal control.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the
first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that
might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal
control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Richard A. Teaman, cPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA • Javier H. Carrillo, cPA o O
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951 .274.7828 FAX 0 www.trscpas.com O O
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination
of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests
disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government
Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to Management of the City of Moorpark in a separate letter dated
December 4, 2009.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, federal awarding
agencies and pass - through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.
E
December 4, 2009
RS TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMfTH, INC.
07CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed
in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark, California (City) as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards
applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City's internal control over financial reporting.
A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements
on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies,
that adversely affects the entity's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data
reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not
be prevented or detected by the entity's internal control.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in
more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented
or detected by the entity's internal control.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the
first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that
might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal
control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA a Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA a Javier H. Carrillo, cf A n O
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com 7
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination
of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests
disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government
Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to Management of the City of Moorpark in a separate letter dated
December 4, 2009.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, federal awarding
agencies and pass - through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.
December 4, 2009
291
07RSCEAMAN,RPUBLIC A COUNT INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and
Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed
in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Moorpark, California (City) as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards
applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City's internal control over financial reporting.
A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements
on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies,
that adversely affects the entity's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data
reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote
likelihood that a misstatement of the entity's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not
be prevented or detected by the entity's internal control.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in
more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented
or detected by the entity's internal control.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the
first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that
might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal
control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA• Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA• David M. Ramirez, cpA• Javier H. Carrillo, (,r -A 292
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500• 951.274.7828 FAX www.trscpas.com
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination
of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests
disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government
Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to Management of the City of Moorpark in a separate letter dated
December 4, 2009.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, federal awarding
agencies and pass - through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.
December 4, 2009
293
Attachment 4
294
RS TEAMAN. RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
07CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES
APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet of the City of
Moorpark, California, for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Moorpark,
California and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to
the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article MHB of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the
City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City of Moorpark's
management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit worksheet. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted
in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The
sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no
representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.
The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:
1. We obtained the completed worksheets and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those
worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also
compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned documents to those that were selected by a
recorded vote of the City Council.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet, we added last year's limit to total adjustments and agreed the
resulting amount to this year's limit.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the other
documents referenced in # 1 above.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the prior
year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion
on the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures
have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by the League
publication entitled Article U11B of the California Constitution.
This report is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Moorpark, California and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public
record and its distribution is not limited.
December 4, 2009
Richard f,. Tearnan, cPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA • Javier H. Carrillo, c;,A 295
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 a 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAX • www.trscpas.com
CITY OF MOORPARK
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT COMPUTATION
2008 —2009
Non - Residential New Construction
Population Change
City Population Growth
Non - Residential New Construction Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
2007 — 2008 Appropriations Limit
2008 — 2009 Appropriations Limit
($20,788,056 X 1.0674)
$ 20.788.056
22.189.171
2008 —2009
4.51%
2.13%
1.0451
1.0213
1.0674
296
RS TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
70CERTtFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES
APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet of the City of
Moorpark, California, for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Moorpark,
California and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to
the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article )WIB of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the
City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City of Moorpark's
management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit worksheet. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted
in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The
sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no
representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.
The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:
1. We obtained the completed worksheets and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those
worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also
compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned documents to those that were selected by a
recorded vote of the City Council.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet, we added last year's limit to total adjustments and agreed the
resulting amount to this year's limit.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the other
documents referenced in # 1 above.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the prior
year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion
on the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures
have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by the League
publication entitled Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
This report is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Moorpark, California and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public
record and its distribution is not limited.
December 4, 2009
Richard A. Teaman, CPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, cPA � n
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951 .274.7828 FAx • www.trscpas.com 7
CITY OF MOORPARK
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT COMPUTATION
2008 —2009
Non - Residential New Construction
Population Change
City Population Growth
Non - Residential New Construction Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
2007 — 2008 Appropriations Limit
2008 — 2009 Appropriations Limit
($20,788,056 X 1.0674)
20.788.056
22.189.171
2008 —2009
4.51%
2.13%
1.0451
1.0213
1.0674
.m
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES
APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet of the City of
Moorpark, California, for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Moorpark,
California and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to
the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article XIIIB of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the
City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City of Moorpark's
management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit worksheet. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted
in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The
sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no
representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.
The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:
1. We obtained the completed worksheets and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those
worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also
compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned documents to those that were selected by a
recorded vote of the City Council.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet, we added last year's limit to total adjustments and agreed the
resulting amount to this year's limit.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the other
documents referenced in #1 above.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the prior
year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion
on the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures
have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by the League
publication entitled Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
This report is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Moorpark, California and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public
record and its distribution is not limited.
December 4, 2009
Richard A. i= 4_.rran, cPA a Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA a David M. Ramirez, ePA 0 Javier H. Carrillo, c:>A 299
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 0 951.274.9500 9 951 .274.7828 FAX 0 WWW.trscpaS.com
CITY OF MOORPARK
APPROPRIATIONS LEMn COMPUTATION
2008 —2009
Non - Residential New Construction
Population Change
City Population Growth
Non - Residential New Construction Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
2007 — 2008 Appropriations Limit
2008 — 2009 Appropriations Limit
($20,788,056 X 1.0674)
20.788.056
$ 22.189.171
2008 —2009
4.51%
2.13%
1.0451
1.0213
1.0674
300
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES
APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet of the City of
Moorpark, California, for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Moorpark,
California and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to
the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article UIIB of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the
City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City of Moorpark's
management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit worksheet. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted
in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The
sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no
representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.
The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:
1. We obtained the completed worksheets and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those
worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also
compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned documents to those that were selected by a
recorded vote of the City Council.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet, we added last year's limit to total adjustments and agreed the
resulting amount to this year's limit.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the other
documents referenced in #1 above.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the prior
year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion
on the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures
have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by the League
publication entitled Article.URB of the California Constitution.
This report is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Moorpark, California and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public
record and its distribution is not limited.
December 4, 2009
Richard A. Teaman, cPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA • Javier H. Carrillo, GPA O
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 0 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAX • www.trscpas.com
CITY OF MOORPARK
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT COMPUTATION
2008-2009
Non - Residential New Construction
Population Change
City Population Growth
Non - Residential New Construction Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
2007 — 2008 Appropriations Limit
2008 — 2009 Appropriations Limit
($20,788,056 X 1.0674)
20.788.05
22.189.171
2008 —2009
4.51%
2.13%
1.0451
1.0213
1.0674
302
RS TEAI`1AN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
70CERT!FIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES
APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet of the City of
Moorpark, California, for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Moorpark,
California and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to
the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article MUB of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the
City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City of Moorpark's
management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit worksheet. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted
in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The
sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no
representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.
The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:
1. We obtained the completed worksheets and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those
worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also
compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned documents to those that were selected by a
recorded vote of the City Council.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet, we added last year's limit to total adjustments and agreed the
resulting amount to this year's limit.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the other
documents referenced in #1 above.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the prior
year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion
on the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures
have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by the League
publication entitled Article MIIB of the California Constitution.
This report is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Moorpark, California and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public
record and its distribution is not limited.
December 4, 2009
Richard A. Tearnan, CPA a Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA • Javier H. Carrillo, cr'A 303
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 • 951.274.7828 FAX • www.trscpas.com
CITY OF MOORPARK
APPROPRIATIONS LD41T COMPUTATION
2008 —2009
Non - Residential New Construction
Population Change
City Population Growth
Non - Residential New Construction Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
2007 — 2008 Appropriations Limit
2008 — 2009 Appropriations Limit
($20,788,056 X 1.0674)
20.788.05
22.189.171
2008 —2009
4.51%
2.13%
1.0451
1.0213
1.0674
304
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES
APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet of the City of
Moorpark, California, for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Moorpark,
California and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to
the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article XIIIB of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the
City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City of Moorpark's
management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit worksheet. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted
in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The
sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no
representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.
The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:
1. We obtained the completed worksheets and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those
worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also
compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned documents to those that were selected by a
recorded vote of the City Council.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet, we added last year's limit to total adjustments and agreed the
resulting amount to this year's limit.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the other
documents referenced in #1 above.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the prior
year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion
on the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures
have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by the League
publication entitled Article XIUB of the California Constitution.
This report is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Moorpark, California and is not
intended to be and should not be used.by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public
record and its distribution is not limited.
December 4, 2009
Richard A. Teaman, cPA • Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA • David M. Ramirez, cPA • Javier H. Carrillo, cf'A 305
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.95000 951.274.7828 FAX• www.trscpas.com
CITY OF MOORPARK
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT COMPUTATION
2008 —2009
Non - Residential New Construction
Population Change
City Population Growth
Non - Residential New Construction Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
2007 — 2008 Appropriations Limit
2008 — 2009 Appropriations Limit
($20,788,056 X 1.0674)
$ 20.788.056
$ 22.189,171
2008 —2009
4.51%
2.13%
1.0451
1.0213
1.0674
306
07RSCERTIFIED R TIF I E RAMIRI C A SMITH, INC.
CENTIFIED PUBIIr, ACCOUNTANTS
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES
APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet of the City of
Moorpark, California, for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Moorpark,
California and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to
the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article XIIIB of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the
City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City of Moorpark's
management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit worksheet. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted
in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The
sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no
representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.
The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:
1. We obtained the completed worksheets and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those
worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also
compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned documents to those that were selected by a
recorded vote of the City Council.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet, we added last year's limit to total adjustments and agreed the
resulting amount to this year's limit.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the other
documents referenced in #1 above.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the prior
year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion
on the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures
have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by the League
publication entitled Article MUB of the California Constitution.
This report is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Moorpark, California and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public
record and its distribution is not limited.
&,... 4.7 1 J_,�
December 4, 2009
Richard A. Tearnan, CPA@ Greg W. Fankhanel, CPAs David M. Ramirez, CPAs Javier H. Carrillo, c;'A. 307
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 s 951.274.9500@ 951 .274.7828 FAX* www.trscpas.com
X
CITY OF MOORPARK
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT COMPUTATION
2008 —2009
Non - Residential New Construction
Population Change
City Population Growth
Non - Residential New Construction Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
2007 — 2008 Appropriations Limit
2008 — 2009 Appropriations Limit
($20,788,056 X 1.0674)
20.788.056
$ 22.189.171
2008 —2009
4.51%
2.13%
1.0451
1.0213
1.0674
1'
70RSIT-AVv1AN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
CEBT!FIEO PUBLIC, ACCOUNTANTS
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES
APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet of the City of
Moorpark, California, for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Moorpark,
California and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to
the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article XHIB of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the
City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. The City of Moorpark's
management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit worksheet. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted
in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The
sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no
representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.
The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:
1. We obtained the completed worksheets and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those
worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also
compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned documents to those that were selected by a
recorded vote of the City Council.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet, we added last year's limit to total adjustments and agreed the
resulting amount to this year's limit.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the other
documents referenced in # 1 above.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet to the prior
year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year.
Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.
We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion
on the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures
have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by the League
publication entitled Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
This report is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Moorpark, California and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public
record and its distribution is not limited.
December 4, 2009
Richard A. Teaman, cPA a Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA a David M. Ramirez, CPA e Javier H. Carrillo, (-,-'A 3 0 9
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 a 951.274.9500 a 951.274.7828 FAX a www.trscpas.com
a
CITY OF MOORPARK
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT COMPUTATION
2008 —2009
Non - Residential New Construction
Population Change
City Population Growth
Non - Residential New Construction Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
2007 — 2008 Appropriations Limit
2008 — 2009 Appropriations Limit
($20,788,056 X 1.0674)
$ 20.788.056
22.182,171
2008 —2009
4.51%
2.13%
1.0451
1.0213
1.0674
310
Attachment 5
311
TEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMrrH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark (City) for the year ended June 30, 2009 and have
issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. Professional standards require that we provide you with
the following information related to our audit.
Our Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States and Government
Auditing Standards
As stated in our engagement letter dated February 24, 2009, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to express an opinion about whether the financial statements prepared by management with
your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting
in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the
determination of fmancial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those
provisions was not an objective of our audit.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.
We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are
not required to design procedures specifically to. identify such matters.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated in our
engagement letter dated February 24, 2009.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA ® Greg W. Fankhanel, CPAs David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 312
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500* 951.274.7828 FAX • www.trscpas.com
MEMORIES 0i:
aY
Significant Audit Findings
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. As described in
Note 9 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to Other Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions (OPEB) by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards
(GASB Statement) No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits
Other Than Pensions, in the 2008 -09 fiscal year. The application of existing policies was not changed
during the year ended June 30, 2009. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. There are no significant transactions that have
been recognized in the financial statements in a different period than when the transaction occurred.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future
events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial
statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from
those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:
Management's estimates of the useful lives for capital assets are based on the expectation that the
capital assets will be of use to the City over the specified useful lives. We evaluated the key factors
and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to
the financial statements taken as whole.
The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement
disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most
sensitive disclosure(s) affecting the financial statements were:
The disclosure of accumulated depreciation in Note 5 to the financial statements is based on estimated
useful lives which could differ from actual useful lives of each capitalized item.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our
audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the
audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a
result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
313
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial
accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be
significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such
disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management
representation letter dated December 4, 2009.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application
of an accounting principle to the City's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's
opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting
accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge,
there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing
standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions
occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our
retention.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Very truly yours,
314
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMfTH, INC.
CERTI PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark (City) for the year ended June 30, 2009 and have
issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. Professional standards require that we provide you with
the following information related to our audit.
Our Reponsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accppted in the United States and Government
Auditing Standards
As stated in our engagement letter dated February 24, 2009, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to express an opinion about whether the financial statements prepared by management with
your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting
in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the
determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those
provisions was not an objective of our audit.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.
We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are
not required to design procedures specifically to identify such matters.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated in our
engagement letter dated February 24, 2009.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA 0 Greg W. Fankhanel, CPAs David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 315
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 a 951.274.7828 FAx a www.trscpas.com
INNER
Significant Audit Findings
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. As described in
Note 9 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to Other Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions (OPEB) by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards
(GASB Statement) No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits
Other Than Pensions, in the 2008 -09 fiscal year. The application of existing policies was not changed
during the year ended June 30, 2009. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. There are no significant transactions that have
been recognized in the financial statements in a different period than when the transaction occurred.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future
events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial
statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from
those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:
Management's estimates of the useful lives for capital assets are based on the expectation that the
capital assets will be of use to the City over the specified useful lives. We evaluated the key factors
and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to
the financial statements taken as whole.
The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement
disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most
sensitive disclosure(s) affecting the financial statements were:
The disclosure of accumulated depreciation in Note 5 to the financial statements is based on estimated
useful lives which could differ from actual useful lives of each capitalized item.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our
audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the
audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a
result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
316
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial
accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be
significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such
disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management
representation letter dated December 4, 2009.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application
of an accounting principle to the City's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's
opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting
accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge,
there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing
standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions
occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our
retention.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Very truly yours,
317
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMM-J, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark (City) for the year ended June 30, 2009 and have
issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. Professional standards require that we provide you with
the following information related to our audit.
Our Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States and Government
Auditing Standards
As stated in our engagement letter dated February 24, 2009, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to express an opinion about whether the financial statements prepared by management with
your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting
in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the
determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those
provisions was not an objective of our audit.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.
We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are
not required to design procedures specifically to identify such matters.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated in our
engagement letter dated February 24, 2009.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA a Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA* David M. Ramirez, CPA a Javier H. Carrillo, cPA
42016 . rockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 a 951.274.95oo a 951 .274.7828 FAx a www.trscpas.com 318
- -
Significant Audit Findings
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. As described in
Note 9 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to Other Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions (OPEB) by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards
(GASB Statement) No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits
Other Than Pensions, in the 2008 -09 fiscal year. The application of existing policies was not changed
during the year ended June 30, 2009. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. There are no significant transactions that have
been recognized in the financial statements in a different period than when the transaction occurred.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future
events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial
statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from
those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:
Management's estimates of the useful lives for capital assets are based on the expectation that the
capital assets will be of use to the City over the specified useful lives. We evaluated the key factors
and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to
the financial statements taken as whole.
The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement
disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most
sensitive disclosure(s) affecting the financial statements were:
The disclosure of accumulated depreciation in Note 5 to the financial statements is based on estimated
useful lives which could differ from actual useful lives of each capitalized item.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our
audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the
audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a
result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
319
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial
accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be
significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such
disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management
representation letter dated December 4, 2009.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application
of an accounting principle to the City's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's
opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting
accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge,
there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing
standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions
occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our
retention.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Very truly yours,
320
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMrFH, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark (City) for the year ended June 30, 2009 and have
issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. Professional standards require that we provide you with
the following information related to our audit.
Our Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States and Government
Auditing Standards
As stated in our engagement letter dated February 24, 2009, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to express an opinion about whether the financial statements prepared by management with
your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting
in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the
determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those
provisions was not an objective of our audit.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.
We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are
not required to design procedures specifically to identify such matters.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated in our
engagement letter dated February 24, 2009.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA 0 Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA a David M. Ramirez, CPA a Javier H. Carrillo, CPA
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 a 951.274.9500 9 951.274-7828 FAX 0 www.trscpas.com 3 21
Significant Audit Findings
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. As described in
Note 9 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to Other Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions (OPEB) by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards
(GASB Statement) No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits
Other Than Pensions, in the 2008 -09 fiscal year. The application of existing policies was not changed
during the year ended June 30, 2009. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. There are no significant transactions that have
been recognized in the financial statements in a different period than when the transaction occurred.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future
events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial
statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from
those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:
Management's estimates of the useful lives for capital assets are based on the expectation that the
capital assets will be of use to the City over the specified useful lives. We evaluated the key factors
and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to
the financial statements taken as whole.
The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement
disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most
sensitive disclosure(s) affecting the financial statements were:
The disclosure of accumulated depreciation in Note 5 to the financial statements is based on estimated
useful lives which could differ from actual useful lives of each capitalized item.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our
audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the
audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a
result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
322
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial
accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be
significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such
disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management
representation letter dated December 4, 2009.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application
of an accounting principle to the City's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's
opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting
accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge,
there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing
standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions
occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our
retention.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Very truly yours,
323
07RSTEAMAN. RAMIREZ & SMM-J, INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark (City) for the year ended June 30, 2009 and have
issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. Professional standards require that we provide you with
the following information related to our audit.
Our Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States and Government
Auditing Standards
As stated in our engagement letter dated February 24, 2009, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to express an opinion about whether the financial statements prepared by management with
your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting
in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the
determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those
provisions was not an objective of our audit.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.
We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are
not required to design procedures specifically to identify such matters.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated in our
engagement letter dated February 24, 2009.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA a Greg W Fankhanel, CPA a David M. Ramirez, CPA a Javier H. Carrillo, CPA
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 0 951.274.9500 9 951 .274.7828 FAX a www.trscpas.com 324
Significant Audit Findings
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. As described in
Note 9 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to Other Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions (OPEB) by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards
(GASB Statement) No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits
Other Than Pensions, in the 2008 -09 fiscal year. The application of existing policies was not changed
during the year ended June 30, 2009. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. There are no significant transactions that have
been recognized in the financial statements in a different period than when the transaction occurred.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future
events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial
statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from
those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:
Management's estimates of the useful lives for capital assets are based on the expectation that the
capital assets will be of use to the City over the specified useful lives. We evaluated the key factors
and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to
the financial statements taken as whole.
The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement
disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most
sensitive disclosure(s) affecting the financial statements were:
The disclosure of accumulated depreciation in Note 5 to the financial statements is based on estimated
useful lives which could differ from actual useful lives of each capitalized item.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our
audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the
audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a
result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
325
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial
accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be
significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such
disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management
representation letter dated December 4, 2009.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application
of an accounting principle to the City's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's
opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting
accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge,
there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing
standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions
occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our
retention.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Very truly yours,
326
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMITH, INC.
C ERTIFIED PUBLIC A C C D U N T A N T S
December 4, 2009
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark (City) for the year ended June 30, 2009 and have
issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. Professional standards require that we provide you with
the following information related to our audit.
Our Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States and Government
Auditing Standards
As stated in our engagement letter dated February 24, 2009, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to express an opinion about whether the financial statements prepared by management with
your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting
in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the
determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those
provisions was not an objective of our audit.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.
We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are
not required to design procedures specifically to. identify such matters.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated in our
engagement letter dated February 24, 2009.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA a Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA o David M. Ramirez, CPA a Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 327
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 a 951.274.9500 a 951 .274.7828 FAX a www.trscpas.com
Significant Audit Findings
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. As described in
Note 9 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to Other Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions (OPEB) by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards
(GASB Statement) No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits
Other Than Pensions, in the 2008 -09 fiscal year. The application of existing policies was not changed
during the year ended June 30, 2009. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. There are no significant transactions that have
been recognized in the financial statements in a different period than when the transaction occurred.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future
events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial
statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from
those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:
Management's estimates of the useful lives for capital assets are based on the expectation that the
capital assets will be of use to the City over the specified useful lives. We evaluated the key factors
and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to
the financial statements taken as whole.
The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement
disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most
sensitive disclosure(s) affecting the financial statements were:
The disclosure of accumulated depreciation in Note 5 to the financial statements is based on estimated
useful lives which could differ from actual useful lives of each capitalized item.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our
audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the
audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a
result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
328
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial
accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be
significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such
disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management
representation letter dated December 4, 2009.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application
of an accounting principle to the City's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's
opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting
accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge,
there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing
standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions
occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our
retention.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Very truly yours,
329
07RSTEAMAN, RAMIREZ & SMfTH. INC_
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark (City) for the year ended June 30, 2009 and have
issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. Professional standards require that we provide you with
the following information related to our audit.
Our Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States and Government
Auditing Standards
As stated in our engagement letter dated February 24, 2009, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to express an opinion about whether the financial statements prepared by management with
your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting
in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the
determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those
provisions was not an objective of our audit.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.
We are responsible for. communicating significant matters related to the audit that are in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are
not required to design procedures specifically to identify such matters.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated in our
engagement letter dated February 24, 2009.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA ® Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA o David M. Ramirez, CPA • Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 330
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 • 951.274.9500 s 951 .274.7828 Fax a www_trscpas.com
Significant Audit Findings
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. As described in
Note 9 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to Other Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions (OPEB) by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards
(GASB Statement) No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits
Other Than Pensions, in the 2008 -09 fiscal year. The application of existing policies was not changed
during the year ended June 30, 2009. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. There are no significant transactions that have
been recognized in the financial statements in a different period than when the transaction occurred.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future
events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial
statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from
those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:
Management's estimates of the useful lives for capital assets are based on the expectation that the
capital assets will be of use to the City over the specified useful lives. We evaluated the key factors
and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to
the financial statements taken as whole.
The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement
disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most
sensitive disclosure(s) affecting the financial statements were:
The disclosure of accumulated depreciation in Note 5 to the financial statements is based on estimated
useful lives which could differ from actual useful lives of each capitalized item.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our
audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the
audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a
result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
331
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial
accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be
significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such
disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management
representation letter dated December 4, 2009.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application
of an accounting principle to the City's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's
opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting
accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge,
there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing
standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions
occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our
retention.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Very truly yours,
332
OFRSTEAMAN. RAMIREZ & SMITH. INC.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
December 4, 2009
City Council
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the City of Moorpark (City) for the year ended June 30, 2009 and have
issued our report thereon dated December 4, 2009. Professional standards require that we provide you with
the following information related to our audit.
Our Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States and Government
Auditing Standards
As stated in our engagement letter dated February 24, 2009, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to express an opinion about whether the financial statements prepared by management with
your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting
in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City's financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the
determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those
provisions was not an objective of our audit.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.
We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are in our professional
judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are
not required to design procedures specifically to. identify such matters.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated in our
engagement letter dated February 24, 2009.
Richard A. Teaman, CPA a Greg W. Fankhanel, CPA o David M. Ramirez, CPA a Javier H. Carrillo, CPA 333
4201 Brockton Ave. Suite 100, Riverside CA 92501 a 951.274.9500o 951.274.7828 FAx a www.trscpas.com
Significant Audit Findings
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. As described in
Note 9 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to Other Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions (OPEB) by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards
(GASB Statement) No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits
Other Than Pensions, in the 2008 -09 fiscal year. The application of existing policies was not changed
during the year ended June 30, 2009. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. There are no significant transactions that have
been recognized in the financial statements in a different period than when the transaction occurred.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future
events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial
statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from
those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:
Management's estimates of the useful lives for capital assets are based on the expectation that the
capital assets will be of use to the City over the specified useful lives. We evaluated the key factors
and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to
the financial statements taken as whole.
The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement
disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most
sensitive disclosure(s) affecting the financial statements were:
The disclosure of accumulated depreciation in Note 5 to the financial statements is based on estimated
useful lives which could differ from actual useful lives of each capitalized item.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our
audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the
audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a
result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
334
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial
accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be
significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such
disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management
representation letter dated December 4, 2009.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application
of an accounting principle to the City's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's
opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting
accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge,
there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing
standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions
occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our
retention.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Very truly yours,
335