Loomis staff outline balanced draft 2024–25 budget, propose new ‘Fund 600’ to consolidate capital projects
June 22, 2024 | Loomis, Placer County, California
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Town finance staff presented the draft 2024–25 budget and told the Loomis Town Council the document is balanced but tight, with restricted fund balances earmarked for specific uses and a conservative revenue approach.
The presenter said, "we have $6,636,000 estimated for revenues this year and 6.606 for expenditures," and explained that those figures reflect conservative assumptions and preparation for potential bond financing. Staff walked the council through the town’s multiple fund types — general fund, maintenance district funds, development impact fees, a tree fund, a supplemental law enforcement fund and a solid waste fund — and stressed that many fund balances are restricted to designated purposes.
The presentation highlighted several programmatic and structural items: a proposed 7% cost‑of‑living adjustment for staff; an additional library assistant; a permit technician position replacing an administrative clerk; plans to fill an operations manager role while leaving a lead worker position vacant; increased allocations for utilities, insurance and park maintenance; and a suite of one‑time costs including consultants, an extra audit and a planned new financial software rollout for which staff cited a $584,000 implementation estimate.
On capital planning and transparency, staff introduced a new accounting mechanism, "Fund 600," described as a consolidation vehicle that will combine appropriations and multiple funding sources for larger projects so the town can better track what funding goes to which project and show true fund balances for capital work. "Introducing Bond 600," staff said, to explain the accounting and reporting rationale for the change.
Staff also said the refuse franchise fee historically recorded in the general fund would be moved to the solid waste fund so revenues align with their intended use. Questions from council members focused on maintenance district assessment terms, how fee estimates are prepared, and the multi‑year mismatch between a two‑year CIP and a one‑year operating budget.
The council directed staff to gather additional information and return at a later date for follow‑up. The staff presentation and council discussion closed with a voice/roll‑call of council members on the pending item as recorded in the meeting.
What happens next: staff will compile the requested clarifications (fund‑by‑fund details, chamber reimbursements, maintenance district timelines and the software rollout plan) and return to a future council meeting for further review and formal adoption steps.
The presenter said, "we have $6,636,000 estimated for revenues this year and 6.606 for expenditures," and explained that those figures reflect conservative assumptions and preparation for potential bond financing. Staff walked the council through the town’s multiple fund types — general fund, maintenance district funds, development impact fees, a tree fund, a supplemental law enforcement fund and a solid waste fund — and stressed that many fund balances are restricted to designated purposes.
The presentation highlighted several programmatic and structural items: a proposed 7% cost‑of‑living adjustment for staff; an additional library assistant; a permit technician position replacing an administrative clerk; plans to fill an operations manager role while leaving a lead worker position vacant; increased allocations for utilities, insurance and park maintenance; and a suite of one‑time costs including consultants, an extra audit and a planned new financial software rollout for which staff cited a $584,000 implementation estimate.
On capital planning and transparency, staff introduced a new accounting mechanism, "Fund 600," described as a consolidation vehicle that will combine appropriations and multiple funding sources for larger projects so the town can better track what funding goes to which project and show true fund balances for capital work. "Introducing Bond 600," staff said, to explain the accounting and reporting rationale for the change.
Staff also said the refuse franchise fee historically recorded in the general fund would be moved to the solid waste fund so revenues align with their intended use. Questions from council members focused on maintenance district assessment terms, how fee estimates are prepared, and the multi‑year mismatch between a two‑year CIP and a one‑year operating budget.
The council directed staff to gather additional information and return at a later date for follow‑up. The staff presentation and council discussion closed with a voice/roll‑call of council members on the pending item as recorded in the meeting.
What happens next: staff will compile the requested clarifications (fund‑by‑fund details, chamber reimbursements, maintenance district timelines and the software rollout plan) and return to a future council meeting for further review and formal adoption steps.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
