Home › News › Local News
Simi Valley sees revenue shortfall of $820,000
Largest loss posted in sales, development-related taxes
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from Local NewsAt the middle of the fiscal year, Simi Valley is seeing an $820,000 shortfall in revenues — 3.2 percent below what the city had projected for its budget.
The biggest loss was in revenue from sales and development-related taxes, down $756,000.
The loss is in line with a statewide revenue shortfall, said Jim Purtee, director of the Department of Administrative Services.
"As housing dovetails off, the revenue is not coming in as we expected," Purtee said. "But we had projected it to slow down, and it certainly slowed down."
When the housing boom was on, development-related taxes had a growth rate in the 8-10 percent range, he said.
The city has a budget of $63 million. It has made some cuts and saved about $2.1 million this year.
The city has saved money by implementing a soft hiring freeze since September. Key positions are getting filled, but each position is getting looked at more carefully, Purtee said.
With continued spending restraint, general fund expenditures are projected to be below budget, a staff report says.
The City Council will discuss the mid-year budget Monday night and look at the city's progress toward achieving goals and programs set forth in the city's annual budget.
Another hit to the projected budget was a loss of $240,015 in revenues from licenses and permits, including building permits, which accounts for nearly the entire shortfall.
Revenues from the state and federal governments dropped by $187,800. About $164,700 comes from a lack of motor vehicle in-lieu fees.
The distribution of money comes from a state formula, and the money depends on when the state government sends the money back to cities, Purtee said.
The city made money in its use of the money and property category, which includes investments that go back into the general fund. About $140,000 was added to the coffers from those investments or bonds.
The city staff is requesting $67,500 to purchase new treasury management software to keep this source thriving, Purtee said.
The program includes daily updates from investment firms, analysts and market economists regarding the securities market. About $13,000 is being requested from the general fund, with the remainder to come out of non-general funds.
"This is for the safety of taxpayers' money, to analyze risk in the market, make sure we're not going in the wrong direction," Purtee said.
Some small increases in hourly salaries are being requested for police records technicians and a police information and analysis manager.
The City Council will meet at 6:30 p.m. Monday at 2929 Tapo Canyon Road.
Posted by goodwin21 on February 23, 2008 at 7:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
63 Million is excessive for a City the size of Simi. It's about time to balance the budget, stop the duplication of employees and outsource services to the private sector that can perform them and still make a profit. This City is becoming another welfare city that hires more and more employees and gets less and less done.
Posted by dcsfancy on February 23, 2008 at 8:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Time to cut and trim the fat. Downsize!
Posted by Freedom1 on February 23, 2008 at 3:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I live in one of the older neighborhoods in Simi Valley (built in 1963). Our streets have only been resurfaced once in over 40 years and the parkway trees, planted by the city in the 1970's, have destroyed the gutter water flow and the sidewalks creating a real safety hazard. We have begged the city to remove the trees and fix the gutter and sidewalk problems. They put asphalt patches on the sidewalks and spray the gutters when asked to for disease carrying mosquitos when summer comes, but nothing more. Yet they can spend $100,000 on a lighted sign to announce to folks on the 118 freeway they are entering the city. Amazing!
Posted by rg on February 23, 2008 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Goodwin, I don't know where you come from but $63 million isn't a lot of money any more. Before calling it excessive I suggest you take a look at the budget and figure out just where they are wasting the money.
Posted by caskier on February 25, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Freedom1 - I believe the lighted sign was not purchased by the city, but instead came from volunteer organizations and private funding.
Posted by SimiProud on February 25, 2008 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Time to cut! As a matter of fact, the city council new this was coming so the cutting should have begun longggggg ago.
And NOT the essentials like schools, seniors, homeless, fire, police, etc.
Just the PORK! Just the PORK!
Posted by goodwin21 on February 26, 2008 at 12:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
RG - Don't know where you studied economics, but $63 Million to run a city of less than 150000 people is out of control.
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
- Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
- Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
- Threats, whether obvious or veiled.
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
There are 7 comments to this article.
Comments are found beneath the Yahoo! ad below.