Re ve nue S urplus (S hortfalls)
Revenue Surplus (Shortfalls)
10%
W arning T re nd:
8%
Increase in revenue shortfalls as a percentage of actual Net Operating Revenues
6%
F ormula: Revenue Surplus (Shortfall) Net Operating Revenues
F is c a l y e a r: Revenue Surplus (Shortfall) Net Operating Revenues R e v e nue S urp lus (S ho rtfa ll) a s a p e rc e nta g e o f N e t O p e ra ting R e v e nue s
4% 2% 0% 2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Fiscal year
2011 2,029,438 54,400,130
2012 4,804,900 58,526,977
2013 3,461,848 61,519,761
2014 1,095,374 63,761,658
2015 348,710 67,797,696
3 .7 %
8 .2 %
5 .6 %
1 .7 %
0 .5 %
Description: This indicator examines the differences between revenue estimates and revenues actually received during the fiscal year. Major discrepancies that continue year after year can indicate a declining economy, inefficient collection procedures, or inaccurate estimating techniques. Discrepancies may also indicate that high revenue estimates are being made to accommodate political pressures. If revenue shortfalls are increasing in frequency or size, a detailed analysis should be made to pinpoint the source.
Commentary: This indicator reflects the difference between revenues estimated in the Final Adopted Budget and revenues actually received. Major shortfalls can indicate inaccurate estimating techniques, sharp fluctuations in the economy or inefficient revenue collection. Revenue shortfalls may result in mid-year cuts of services, spending of reserve funds, or increased use of short-term borrowing. Large or frequent shortfalls constitute a warning trend and indicate a need to be more conservative in revenue projections during the budget process.
Analysis: The Town's budgeting process combines historical revenue trends with current and anticipated economic conditions. Budget amounts are compared to actual throughout the year and adjustments made through supplemental appropriations. Surplus or shortfalls within +/- 4% are considered reasonable. The Town has shown a surplus each of the last five years. The amount of the each surplus indicates conservative, yet reasonable budgeting. 2011: The surplus is primarily a result of increased deficit reduction fees and sales tax revenue. 2012: The surplus primarily a result of an improved economy and significant increases in sales tax revenue and deficit reduction fees. 2013: The surplus primarily a result of an improved economy and significant increases in sales tax revenue and deficit reduction fees. 2014: The surplus primarily a result of an improved economy and significant increases in sales tax revenue. 2015: The surplus primarily a result of an improved economy and significant increases in sales tax revenue.
Appendix
290