Finance Committee - 3/15/2017 Page 5
Mr. McIntire
It’s actually over on page 38 in the first column of numbers. You see your total expenditures of $253.8 million.
Alderman Cookson
So $253.8 million is the denominator. Your unassigned $28 million is going to be 11 percent of that $253.8
million?
Mr. McIntire
Yes.
Alderman Cookson
That’s the calculation you’re using to determine the percentage?
Mr. McIntire
Correct. One other issue that may come into that calculation is on page 38. You have some other financing
sources and uses. The transfer out of $5.3 million or almost $5.4 million, | didn’t recalculate this but | think that
$5.3 million may be in the denominator number.
Alderman Cookson
So it is going to be $253.9 million less the $5.4 million?
Mr. McIntire
No, plus the $5.4 million.
Alderman Cookson
So it’s actually going to be 258 something million.
Mr. McIntire
Yes.
Alderman Cookson
Your total expenditures is not even a $500,000 difference over last year. Your statement was there’s a
$400,000 difference. It’s staying just about the same. We’re not doing anything differently. We're expending
the same amount year over year over year. We're getting more in revenues, whether it be motor vehicles or
some other line item, we’re bringing in revenues but we’re not truly expending anything more.
Mr. McIntire
That’s a very difficult question to give a yes or no answer to. You've identified the total expenditures on page
38 in the general fund. You’re suggesting, and | assume, they are very close, but one of the things when we
were looking at the budget and the actual page, where the unspent appropriations were just under $43,000,
there’s some year-end transactions that are sometimes encumbered, sometimes they are escrowed,
sometimes they are transferred out. All of those factors, and I’m trying to not make this overly complicated, but
to just give a yes or no answer to your question, | would want to get a little more technical before | would
answer that with a yes or no.
