The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 11152016 - Finance Cte Agenda Pkt FINANCE COMMITTEE November 15, 2016 1:00 P.M. After the Board Meeting 651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez Supervisor Federal D. Glover, Chair Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, Vice Chair Agenda Items: Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee 1.Introductions 2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes). 3. CONSIDER approving the Record of Action for the October 13, 2016, Finance Committee meeting (Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director) 4. CONSIDER attached report on the funding shortfall in County Service Area M-28. (Brian Balbas, Chief Deputy Director/Public Works). 5. CONSIDER recommendations for FY 2017/18 Board-Administered Special Revenues (Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director) 6. CONSIDER a review of the County's 2006 County Budget Policy (Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director) 7.The next meeting is currently scheduled for December 8, 2016. 8.Adjourn The Finance Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Finance Committee meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting. Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Finance Committee less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 651 Pine Street, 10th floor, during normal business hours. Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day prior to the published meeting time. For Additional Information Contact: Lisa Driscoll, Committee Staff Phone (925) 335-1021, Fax (925) 646-1353 lisa.driscoll@cao.cccounty.us FINANCE COMMITTEE 3. Meeting Date:11/15/2016 Subject:Record of Action for October 13, 2016 Finance Committe Meeting Submitted For: FINANCE COMMITTEE, Department:County Administrator Referral No.: N/A Referral Name: Record of Action Presenter: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director Contact: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director (925) 335-1023 Referral History: County Ordinance requires that each County body keep a record of its meetings. Though the record need not be verbatim, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the discussions made in the meetings. Referral Update: Attached for the Committee's consideration is the Record of Action for its October 13, 2016 meeting. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): Staff recommends approval of the Record of Action for the October 13, 2016 meeting. Fiscal Impact (if any): No fiscal impact. Attachments Draft Record of Action October 13, 2016 D R A F T FINANCE COMMITTEE October 13, 2016 10:30 A.M. 651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez Supervisor Federal D. Glover, Chair Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, Vice Chair Agenda Items:Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee Present: Chair Federal D. Glover Vice Chair Mary N. Piepho Staff Present:Lisa Driscoll, Finance Director Laura Strobel, County Administration Brian Balbas, Public Works Ramesh Kanzaria, Public Works Wanda Quever, Public Works Gabriel Lemus, Department of Conservation & Development Christine Louie, Department of Conservation & Development Attendees: Lloyd Madden Joanna Griffith 1.Introductions 2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes). There were no public comments. 3.Staff recommends approval of the Record of Action for the June 9, 2016 meeting. The Record of Action for the June 9, 2016, Finance Committee meeting was approved as recommended. AYE: Chair Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair Mary N. Piepho Passed 4.Accept attached Capital Projects Report. Ramesh Kanzaria presented the Quarterly Capital Report. Mr. Kanzaria reviewed the summary page Ramesh Kanzaria presented the Quarterly Capital Report. Mr. Kanzaria reviewed the summary page in detail. There are currently 60 projects funded at $77.2 million. There were 14 new projects since the last report totaling $5.9 million and 11 projects were completed ($5.2 million). In addition there are 16 Facilities Life-Cycle Investment Program (FLIP) projects totaling $26,017,286 of which 8 were finished and 8 are in process (no change since previous report). The report also includes FLIP projects being managed by the Facilities Maintenance Division and Potential Surplus Property Report prepared by the Real Estate Division. Supervisor Glover requested an update on the Pittsburg Clinic. Mr. Kanzaria responded that there were several stages of remodel and many were completed. Mr. Kanzaria next summarized the Potential Surplus Property Report. Supervisor Piepho thanked Mr. Kanzaria for the report and requested that future reports be updated to include an identifier for vacant buildings, and an estimated value broken out by improvements, land, etc. There were no further questions. AYE: Chair Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair Mary N. Piepho Passed 5.Accept attached recommendation to increase the occupancy cost factor from the current 1% to 3%. Brian Balbas and Wanda Quever from Public Works presented a report requesting that the current $750,000 per year capital renewal rate for facility maintenance and replacement be increased in the 2017/18 fiscal year. The original rate, which was offset by general fund dollars, was approximately 1% and was intended to build funding for preventative maintenance. The current funding level doesn't cover annual maintenance and provides no funds for preventative maintenance. The request was to increase the rate to approximately 3% or $2,550,000 per year. The request was approved. AYE: Chair Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair Mary N. Piepho Passed 6.CONSIDER accepting Department of Conservation and Development's attached recommendations regarding a request to substantially amend the County's FY 2016/17 Community Development Block Grand (CDBG) Program Action Plan. Christine Louie, CDBG Program Planner, recommended that the Community Housing and Development Corporation of North Richmond - Neighborhood House Multicultural Senior and Family Center be allocated an additional $9,700 in CDBG funds. She noted that the funds will come from CDBG income, primarily from housing project residual receipts. Supervisor Piepho asked if the request had been made during the original application if it would have affected the outcome. Staff responded that it would not. The item was approved. AYE: Chair Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair Mary N. Piepho Passed 7.The next meeting is currently scheduled for November 10, 2016. 8.Adjourn The Finance Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Finance Committee meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting. Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Finance Committee less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 651 Pine Street, 10th floor, during normal business hours. Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day prior to the published meeting time. For Additional Information Contact: Lisa Driscoll, Committee Staff Phone (925) 335-1021, Fax (925) 646-1353 lisa.driscoll@cao.cccounty.us FINANCE COMMITTEE 4. Meeting Date:11/15/2016 Subject:Funding Shortfall in County Service Area M-28 Submitted For: Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Department:Public Works Referral No.: N/A Referral Name: Facility Maintenance and Replacement Presenter: Brian Balbas, Chief Deputy Director Contact: Brian Balbas (925) 313-2284 Referral History: Referral was not submitted to the full Board of Supervisors due to timing. Referral Update: This is the first time this issue is being presented to the Finance Committee. Attached for the Committee's recommendation is a report on the funding shortfall for CSA M-28. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): CONSIDER attached report on the funding shortfall in County Service Area M-28 (Bethel Island), as recommended by Public Works Director. Fiscal Impact (if any): The potential cost impact to the general fund is $770,000. Attachments CSA M-28 Staff Report FINANCE COMMITTEE 5. Meeting Date:11/15/2016 Subject:FY 2017/18 Recommended Budget Development - Board-Administered Special Revenues Submitted For: FINANCE COMMITTEE, Department:County Administrator Referral No.: 11/14/16 SD.8 Referral Name: County Budget Policy - Resolution No. 2006/677 Presenter: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director Contact: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director (925) 335-1023 Referral History: On March 2, 2015, the Finance Committee began an update of the County's Budget Policy. The Board-Administered Special Revenue reference binder was discussed in the context of budget policy as well. The Committee requested that staff continue to develop a summary report that describes all of these special revenues and includes a detailed list of how the funds are annually distributed. The details would include how the distribution of monies is annually determined, who gets the revenue, how much they get, and what the monies are used for. When available the report would list sums received and distributed to date as well as annual figures. This report is partially described in the supplement to the County Budget Policy adopted by the Board of Supervisors on December 3, 2013. Staff was directed to review potential best practices in budget policy for submission to the Committee. The Committee will review staff's recommendations and continue to review the County Budget Policy in its entirety. In the meantime, staff was directed to begin implementation of the new policies in the FY 2015/16 Recommended Budget and letter. Per the Committee's direction, FY 2016/17 budget recommendations were made on February 18, 2016. The attached report includes recommendations for FY 2017/18. Referral Update: See attached information and preliminary recommendations for FY 2017/18. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): ACCEPT Board-Administered Special Revenue recommendations for FY 2017/18. Attachments Board Administered Special Revenue Report Board‐Administered Special RevenuesTABNAMEPY Fund BalanceEarned RevenuesExpendituresGeneral Purpose Revenue AllocationFund Balance June 30, 2016Budgeted RevenueBudgeted ExpenditureGeneral Purpose Revenue AllocationEstimated Fund Balance June 30, 2017Budgeted RevenueBudgeted ExpenditureGeneral Purpose Revenue Allocation1 Child Care Affordability FundZero Zero2 Contra Costa Futures Fund 1,507,780 0 67,500 0 1,440,280 0 67,500 0 1,372,780 0 67,500 03 Contra Costa Transfer Station, Martinez0 1,640,087 412,546‐1,227,541Zero 700,0000‐700,000Zero 700,000‐700,0004 County Regional Enhancement Contributions51,102 0 20,0000 31,1020 20,0000 11,1020 11,10205 Crocket Rodeo Return‐to‐Source120,000 542,600 482,6000 180,000 464,820 644,82000 525,000 525,00006 Dougherty Valley Transit Fees202,211 955,321 764,3300 393,202 671,000 702,3730 361,829 738,100 726,00007 Industrial Job Training & Education FeeZeroZero8 Integrated Resource Recovery Facility (IRRF) Mitigation319,222 192,372 126,7380 384,856 192,000 135,0000 441,856 192,000 140,00009 Keller Canyon Landfill Surcharge 0 2,169,639459,420‐1,710,219Zero 1,400,0000‐1,400,000Zero 1,400,00001,400,0009.1 Keller Canyon Landfill Mitigation688,553 1,359,989 1,453,8600 594,682 1,367,796 1,450,0000 512,478 1,381,474 1,450,000010 Livable Communities Trust Fund6,629,390 619,15200 7,248,542 800,000 500,0000 7,548,542 700,000 500,000011 RSS Abatement42,312 902 20,0000 23,214000 23,214000* Defunct. No new source of funds/funds expended.FY 2015‐16 Prior‐Year ReviewFY 2016‐17 Current Year BudgetFY 2017‐18 RecommendationPage 1 of 2 Board‐Administered Special RevenuesTABNAMEAllocation Policy #Source of FundsWho Makes Funding RecommendationWhere is it Annually DistributedHow is it Used1 Child Care Affordability Fund2 Contra Costa Futures FundFund balance ‐ no new revenue CDBG Staff on behalf of District IV Supervisor District IVOffsets District IV staff costs (0.60 FTE)3 Contra Costa Transfer Station, Martinez25% of Transfer Station revenue County Administrator100% to General Purpose Revenue Offsets costs of code enforcement & recycling4 County Regional Enhancement ContributionsFund balance ‐ no new revenueCDBG Staff on behalf of Board of Supervisors City of San Ramon, Town of Danville Annual StreetSmarts Program (traffic safety education program)5 Crocket Rodeo Return‐to‐SourceProperty Tax revenueCounty Administrator to the Board of Supervisors, based on recommendation of the Foundation and District VCrocket Community FoundationDiffers annually, reported to Board, generally used for Crockett Library, Recreation Department, Crockett‐Carquinez Fire Dept, Sanitary Department5Rodeo/Unocal/Conoco PhilipsProperty Tax revenueCounty AdministratorDistrict VCrockett,Rodeo, Tormey – community improvements6 Dougherty Valley Transit FeesPer Unit applicant feesDepartment of Conservation & Development Transit Services (e.g. County Connection) May only be used by a transit provider as part of the cost of providing transit services to Dougherty Valley.7Industrial Job Training & Education Fee8 Integrated Resource Recovery Facility (IRRF) MitigationMitigation feeDepartment of Conservation & Development Sheriff‐CoronerResident Sheriff's Deputy9 Keller Canyon Landfill Surcharge & MitigationSurcharge & Mitigation fees Department of Conservation & Development to the Board of Supervisors based on recommendation of District VVarious OrganizationsTo mitigate the effects of the landfill site by funding community‐based organizations for: Youth Services; Code Enforcement; Community Beautification; Public Safety; and Community Services.10Livable Communities Trust FundPer Unit developer feeDepartment of Conservation & Development Not applicableTo assist with the implementation of the Smart Growth Action Plan.11 RSS AbatementRichmond Sanitary Service ‐ adjusted rates to customersDistrict IVarious OrganizationsFor use in instituting programs/services that directly aid in the prevention or abatement of illegal dumping within areas served by the Richmond Sanitary Service.* Defunct. No new source of funds/funds expended.Page 2 of 2 FINANCE COMMITTEE 6. Meeting Date:11/15/2016 Subject:Update of County Budget Policy (Resolution No. 2006/677) Submitted For: FINANCE COMMITTEE, Department:County Administrator Referral No.: N/A Referral Name: County Budget Policy Presenter: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director Contact: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director (925) 335-1023 Referral History: On April 19, 2005, the Board of Supervisors adopted a policy related to the practice of allocating general fund revenue to specific communities or programs (attached). On November 2, 2006, a formal Budget Policy was presented to the Finance Committee and approved for submission to the full Board of Supervisors. On November 14, 2006, the Board of Supervisors adopted the attached County Budget Policy - Resolution No. 2006/677 (attached). This policy was developed after Standard & Poor’s announced Financial Management Assessment Criteria would be used for future ratings. This announcement was important. In the past, it was difficult to judge how an agency would be rated, this was the beginning of the development of specific assessments of issuer’s policies. On December 15, 2009, the Board of Supervisors affirmed the policy on special revenue mitigation funds (attached). On December 3, 2013, the Board of Supervisors adopted a new policy on governing special revenues administered by the Board of Supervisors and directed staff to incorporate these policies into the County's formal Budget Policy. On March 3, 2015, the Finance Committee began review of the policy. Referral Update: Since adoption by the Board of the original Budget Policy, S&P has rated the County's fiscal policies as "Strong" and has increased the County's credit rating to AAA. A rating of Strong "indicates that practices are strong, well-embedded and likely sustainable; County maintains best practices that support credit quality and are used in daily operations; policies may be formal". In 2006 when the original policy was adopted, the County was loosely following a list of 12 habits of highly successful finance officers. We worked with our financial advisor to rank the 12 habits in order of importance and addressed them. The practices/policies are: Fund balance reserve policy/working capital reserves;1. Debt affordability reviews and polices;2. Superior debt disclosure practices;3. Multiyear financial forecasting;4. Monthly or quarterly financial reporting and monitoring;5. Pay-as-you-go capital funding polices;6. Rapid debt retirement polices (greater than 65% in 10 years);7. Contingencies planning polices;8. Policies regarding nonrecurring revenue;9. 5-year capital improvement plan that integrates operating cost of new facilities;10. Financial reporting awards; and11. Budgeting awards.12. Over the last ten years the County has followed/met each of these "habits" except the 5-year capital improvement plan that integrates operating cost of new facilities. It is recommended that the County's Budget Policy be updated to include a capital improvement plan that integrates capital life-cycle costs as well as all operating costs. A thorough review and update of the County's Budget Policy is warranted. A draft of a new policy is attached for discussion purposes/direction. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): Continue review of the County's 2006 County Budget Policy to consider future recommendations for changes/updates. Fiscal Impact (if any): No specific fiscal impact. Attachments Recommended Updates to the County Budget Policy April 19, 2005 Document November 14, 2006 Document December 15, 2009 Document December 3, 2013 Document GFOA- Recommended Budget Practices from the National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting Update to County Budget Policy Finance Committee 11/15/2016 3 Recognizing that the establishment and maintenance of a budget policy is a key element in enhancing the management of the County’s finances and management of the County’s credit quality, the Board of Supervisors established a County Budget Policy in November of 2006 and revised it in December 2013. The current policy with suggested changes is presented below: 1. Contra Costa County shall annually adopt a budget that balances on- going expenditures with on-going revenue. 2. Contra Costa County shall adopt a budget each year early enough (and no later than May 31) to allow all impact on programs and/or revenues to be in effect by July 1. 3. Contra Costa County shall prepare multi-year (3-5 year) financial projections as part of the annual budget planning process. 4. Contra Costa County shall at a minimum prepare formal mid-year budget reports to the Board of Supervisors detailing actual expenditures and projections through the remainder of the fiscal year. This report will include through December 31 of each year: a. actual net County cost by department by fund b. actual and budgeted expenditure by major object by department c. actual and budgeted revenue by major object by department d. If a particular cost center is projected to be over-budget, a report clearly indicating planned corrective action will be presented to the Board of Supervisors within 30 days of the mid-year report. If necessary, this report will include appropriation and revenue adjustments. 5. The County will not directly allocate a specific General Purpose Revenue source to specific programs/communities. The policy would not apply to mitigation revenue that is derived from a project and intended to offset the environmental impacts from the project on the “host” community. 6. Short-term funding sources shall be used for short-term requirements, one-time uses, or contingencies. 7. Revenue windfalls not included in the budget plan will not be expended during the year unless such spending is required in order to receive the funding. 8. Fee-for-service and federal/state revenue offsets will be sought at every opportunity. 9. As part of the annual budget process, each department shall analyze its fee structure in order to maintain maximum offset for services. 10. The Board of Supervisors shall make reserve funding available for venture capital to be used to increase efficiencies and economies in Update to County Budget Policy 4 Finance Committee 11/15/2016 departments that do not have resources available within their normal operating budgets for such expense. Requests for these funds will be included as part of the annual budget process. 11. The year-end practice of “use it or lose it” shall be changed to “save it and keep it”. The County Administrator’s Office will continue to refine the concept of fund balance sharing as an incentive to departments to maximize resources. Some portion of fund balance credit may be used by operating departments for one-time expenditure. These one-time expenditures shall be used to maximize economy/service delivery/efficiencies/employee satisfaction. Unless specific arrangements are made with the County Administrator’s Office, fund balance credit will be spent/encumbered within the following fiscal year. 12. The annual budget process will include funding decisions for maintaining the County’s facility assets, allowing the Board of Supervisors to weigh competing funding decisions using credible information. 13. Beginning in FY 2008-09, Tthe annual budget process will include a strategic planning and financing process for facilities renewal and new construction projects (short and long term capital budgets) and establishment of a comprehensive management program for the County’s general government real estate assets relative to acquisition, use, disposition, and maintenance. This capital improvement plan should be updated every five years and will integrate operating cost of new facilities and capital life-cycle costs. 14. Each Februaryfall, Contra Costa County shall prepare and make a formal budget report to the Board’s Finance Committee detailing earned revenues and expenditures for all mitigation and community benefit fees, trust and special revenue funds, and special Board appropriations during the prior fiscal year. The report shall identify amounts that were diverted from General-Purpose revenue in order to satisfy a special Board appropriation or other special revenue program. The Finance Committee shall review prior-year expenditures for consistency with the approved purpose of the fees, funds or special Board appropriations, and will forward recommendations for the subsequent budget year to the Board of Supervisors for consideration in the annual budget process. Contra Costa County shall distribute updates to the Board- Administered Special Revenue Reference Book annually. Special Revenues Policy In December 2013, the Board of Supervisors adopted the following policy to ensure clarity and county-wide continuity on the use of various revenue sources. 15. Adopt the following definitions to be used in County policies with regard to special revenues: Update to County Budget Policy Finance Committee 11/15/2016 5 a. Mitigation fee: A monetary exaction other than a tax or special assessment, whether established for a broad class of projects by legislation of general applicability, such as Area of Benefit mitigation fees (County Ordinance Code §913-2.404)1, Drainage fees, and Park Dedication fees, or imposed on a specific project on an ad hoc basis, that is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of mitigating the impacts of the project on the affected community. Such fees are not intended to be a general-purpose revenue measure for the host community. b. Trust Fund: Funds held in trust for any beneficiary or for any purpose, in a separate fund and not commingled with any public funds, earning interest, and to be paid to the beneficiary of such trust upon the termination thereof, including moneys held as trustee, agent or bailee by the state, any county, city or town, or other political subdivision of the state, or any commission, committee, board or office thereof or any court of the state, when deposited in any qualified public depositary. Trust funds are limited to the following purposes as defined by Governmental Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting: Pension, Investment, Private-Purpose and OPEB Irrevocable funds. c. Special Revenue Fund: Funds used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than special assessments, expendable trusts, or major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditure for specified purposes. Examples of special revenue funds are those established for the purpose of financing schools, parks, or libraries. d. Community Benefit Fee: Voluntary payment(s) made by a developer or project sponsor that benefit a defined community, either through capital or community program improvements. These funds, typically, have been intended for uses that will benefit the quality of life for the communities in which a project is approved. In the past, these funds have been identified for such uses as economic development, health care, education, infrastructure, transportation, etc. e. Special Board Appropriation: A designation by the Board of Supervisors dedicating a portion of one or more General-Purpose Revenue sources to a specific program or activity, and/or to benefit a specific geographic area. f. Special Revenues: Collectively, all of the preceding revenues. 1 Area of Benefit mitigation fees are to be used specifically to improve the capacity and safety of the arterial road network within a defined boundary area as development occurs in order to mitigate traffic impacts generated by new development projects. Update to County Budget Policy 6 Finance Committee 11/15/2016 16. Re-affirm Paragraph 5 of the County Budget Policy prohibiting special Board appropriations, which states, “The County will not directly allocate a specific General-Purpose Revenue source to specific programs/communities. The policy would not apply to mitigation revenue that is derived from a project and intended to offset the environmental impacts from the project on the "host" community.” 17.16. Adopt a policy governing the Authorization for Mitigation and Community Benefit Fees and Their Allocation: g.a. Affirm that revenues from existing fees are to be administered by the Supervisor serving in the district for which the fee was created, unless specified otherwise when the fee was established or as an action of the Board of Supervisors, and may require Board of Supervisors approval prior to expenditure. h.b. Affirm that revenues from existing fees are to be used with the support and authorization (to be signified by sponsorship or co- sponsorship of a Board Order/Proposal) of the current Supervisor serving in the district where the fee originated, unless specified otherwise when the fee was created or as an action of the Board of Supervisors. i.c. Affirm that when fees are created in the future, the authorizing Board Order or Resolution must specify:  the type of fee (mitigation or community benefit)  in what geographic area the funds are to be used, e.g., countywide or limited to one or more supervisorial districts or areas within a supervisorial district;  the specific purpose of the fee;  the recommended process for allocating the funds; and  the department that will be responsible for administration of the funds;  measurable performance outcomes that demonstrate how the fee revenue has mitigated the project impacts and otherwise benefited the affected community. j.d. Affirm that no new fees are to be negotiated or created without input or consultation with the current Supervisor serving in the district where the land development project is located. k.e. Affirm that fees developed for Countywide use will be administered by the full Board of Supervisors, with the goal of spending the money equally among supervisorial districts, unless specified otherwise when the fee is established. These fees will be assigned to and administered by a particular County department. Update to County Budget Policy Finance Committee 11/15/2016 7 18.17. Accept the compendium of current special revenue funds for FY 2009/10 and Ppursue opportunities to secure new mitigation and community benefit fees, where appropriate. 19. Amend the County Budget Policy, adopted in November 2006, to include the following new policy: “Each February, Contra Costa County shall prepare and make a formal budget report to the Board’s Finance Committee detailing earned revenues and expenditures for all mitigation and community benefit fees, trust and special revenue funds, and special Board appropriations during the prior fiscal year. The report shall identify amounts that were diverted from General-Purpose revenue in order to satisfy a special Board appropriation or other special revenue program. The Finance Committee shall review prior-year expenditures for consistency with the approved purpose of the fees, funds or special Board appropriations, and will forward recommendations for the subsequent budget year to the Board of Supervisors for consideration in the annual budget process. Contra Costa County shall distribute updates to the Board-Administered Special Revenue Reference Book annually.” Governments make program and service decisions and allocate scarce resources to programs and services through the budget process. As a result, the budget process is one of the most important activities undertaken by governments. The quality of decisions resulting from the budget process and the level of their acceptance depends on the budget process that is used. Finding that too little information about effective budgeting practices existed and that an effort to identify and share recommended practices in budgeting was needed, GFOA and seven other state and local government associations created the National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting (NACSLB) in 1995 and charged it with developing a set of recommended practices in the area of state and local budgeting. In December 1997, the Council concluded its work by adopting a budgeting framework and recommended budget practice statements. The GFOA Committee on Governmental Budgeting and Fiscal Policy has continuously reviewed and been involved with the work of the Council. The GFOA Executive Board passed a resolution in support of its ongoing work in October 1997. GFOA endorses the work of the NACSLB, including the NACSLBs definition, mission, and key characteristics of the budget process, stated as follows: Definition of the Budget Process: The budget process consists of activities that encompass the development, implementation, and evaluation of a plan for the provision of services and capital assets. Mission of the Budget Process: To help decision makers make informed choices about the provision of services and capital assets and to promote stakeholder participation in the process. Key Characteristics of the Budget Process: Incorporates a long-term perspective; Establishes linkages to broad organizational goals; Focuses budget decisions on results and outcomes; Involves and promotes effective communication with stakeholders; and Provides incentives to government management and employees. Accordingly, GFOA adopts the NACSLB framework for improved state and local government BACKGROUND: RECOMMENDATION: Recommended Budget Practices from the National Advisory Council on St... http://www.gfoa.org/print/451 1 of 2 11/3/2016 10:43 AM 203 N. LaSalle Street - Suite 2700 | Chicago, IL 60601-1210 | Phone: (312) 977-9700 - Fax: (312) 977-4806 budgeting and recommended budget practice statements. GFOA recommends that state, provincial, and local governments look to the recommended practices of the NACSLB as a model for evaluating and improving their own budget policies and procedures, with the goal of ultimately developing, adopting and implementing their budgets in accordance with these recommended practices. Given the evolving nature of good budgeting and management, these practices are not intended as mandatory prescriptions for governments. Rather, they are recommendations that provide a blueprint for governments to make improvements to their budget processes. Implementation of these practices is expected to be an incremental process that will take place over a number of years. References: Recommended Budget Practices: A Framework for Improved State and Local Government Budgeting, NACSLB, 1998. Recommended Budget Practices CD-ROM, NACSLB, 1998. NACSLBs recommended practices located on GFOAs web site at www.gfoa.org. Recommended Budget Practices from the National Advisory Council on St... http://www.gfoa.org/print/451 2 of 2 11/3/2016 10:43 AM