Loading...
09/07/2006-4B-Agenda Packet-Regular·- AGENDA 4B Sanger, Texas Development Corporation Thursday, September 7, 2006 7:00 P.M. -201 Bolivar 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Approve Minutes: July 13, 2006 August 10, 2006 3. Review Financials. 4. Consider and Possible Action on Proposed Budget 2006/2007. *Consider Project with University of North Texas 5. Consider and Possible Action on Appointment of Officers as Required in the By-Laws Section 5.02. 6. List of Future Agenda Items. 7. Adjournment. This facility is wheelchair accessible and accessible parking spaces are available. Requests for accommodations or interpretive services must be made 48 hours prior to this meeting. Please contact the City Secretary's office at (940) 458-7930 for further information. ' MINUTES: 4B SANGER, TX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION JULY 13, 2006 MEMBERS PRESENT: President Nel Armstrong, Glenn Ervin, John Springer, Thomas Muir, Beverly Branch, Kim Shaw, John Payne. OTHERS PRESENT: Jack Smith -City Manager, Cecile Carson -Economic Development Director, David Pennington -Fire Chief, Paul Edleman -Chairperson Parks Board, Ken Green, Paula Morales. 1. President Nel Armstrong called meeting to order and led invocation. 2. Approve of Minutes: June 1, 2006 Motion was made by Beverly Branch to approve minutes as presented wit_h one correction on page 2 -"park" should be changed to "parking". Seconded by Thomas Muir. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Discussion and Possible Action for Funding Projects for the Next 1 to 3 Years. Cecile Carson presented the Board with presentation regarding ideas that the Parks Board had discussed and addressed. Available funds in the Reserve is $506,791; the Checking total is $24,898; the total Expendable Income is $223,481. Project ideas and proposals were as follows: I. The Quail Run Park Project A. The pavilion was priced at $17,550 B. The basketball court was priced at $34,463 C. The playground was priced at $33,659 D. The skate park was priced at $95,408. E. The parking lot approximately consists of 20-25 spaces ranging in price from $1,500-$2,000; the price per parking was $40,000 F. The total cost for trees was $2,400 G. Hydro-Mulch had no estimate cost due to what phase will be doing and the square footage. Approximate total cost for this project is $223, 430. II. Presbyterian Church project A. Exterior-$40,000 B. Utilities-$41,000 C. Interior-$54,000 Total for this project is $135,000. III. Downtown Plan Total-$20,000 IV. Promotion(max 10%); Total-$53,000. A. Buxton Marketing Analysis Total-$45,000; B. Retail Marketing Plan Total-$5,000; V. Economic Development Incentives total $100,000. Total of all projects is $531,481. Discussion on getting more state grants and how support has increased. President Armstrong and John Springer discussed painting the exterior of the building. John Springer asked how would the restoration of the building be the catalyst for other things. Discussion on restoration of the building. By restoring the building, it would be a community building to have meetings, small weddings, family reunions, art displays, etc. Discussion on other historical landmarks.(Landmark Baptist Church in Sanger, TX). Cecile Carson indicated that representatives from the Texas Historical Commission visited regarding their Main Street application. They commented on the fact that our city has so many historical structures. President Armstrong addressed the desire to have more Sanger historical markers; so far there are only three. Discussion followed regarding state grants. Ms. Carson discussed engineering plans for the sidewalks in the Downtown area to satisfy the Disabilities Act guidelines. She indicated that 10% of the funding may be spent on promotion. Discussion on Buxton Marketing Analysis. Discussion on Quail Run Park. • 4. List of Future Agenda Items a. Soccer Fields b. Baseball Fields c. Boys & Girls Club d. Kid's Water Park. Discussion about future funding for these items. Discussion on the Presbyterian Church. -Discussion of expansion of facilities. Discussion about Homeland Security. Discussion on a new fire station More discussion about the funding for Downtown and Quail Run Park. 5. Meeting adjourned . • Minutes: Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: 4-B Sanger Texas Development Corporation August 10, 2006 NelArmstrong,BeverlyBranch, Thomas Muir, John Payne, John Springer and Glen Ervin Kim Shaw Jack Smith, City Manager, Rose Chavez City Secretary/Asst. City Manager, Cecile Carson, Economic Development Director, Brent Chance, Nate and Wendy Cottle, Kem Green, Michael and Karen Dill 1. President Nel Armstrong called meeting to order. 2. Conduct Public Hearing on Proposed Projects. President Nel Armstrong de~lared public hearing opened. Brent Chance, 306 Deer Run, addressed the Board and emphasized that the residents in that area are excited to finally get a park; however, they want to make it very clear they are strongly against the skate park. Mr. Chance indicated that the citizens feel that a skate park benefits only a small group of citizens. Mr. Chance expressed that they would like the Skate park to go in another designated area. This neighborhood has lots of small children which is a safety concern. The citizens are also concerned with traffic and the noise that it would create. Mr. Chance indicated that Denton has a skate park and it is well supervised and it is there understanding this park will not be. There are 214 homes in that neighborhood and 103 signatures were on the petition he presented to the board that were against the skate park. Mr. Chance indicated that the Park's Board has never contacted the residents in that neighborhood as they have indicated, on this issue. John Payne inquired on the ages of the small children in the neighborhood. It was indicated by Mr. Chance that the children in the neighborhood were less than 10 years of age. Discussion on the ages of the children and how old does a child have to be before they want to pursue skate board roller skating. Nate Cottle, 309 Deer Run Drive, addressed the board and spoke against the skate park. He indicated he participated in the collection of the signatures. He advised that most of the residents that he approached were against the skate park. He also emphasized the lack of supervision. Thomas Muir inquired as to how many homes did this petition cover. Mr. Chance indicated about 50% which is about 110 or 115 homes, currently occupied. This included Mom and Dad signatures. Discussed that 150 homes were contacted. Michael Dill, 115 Teal indicated that the Park will be right in front of their home. They are happy that the park will be in that IQcation; however, he expressed they are against the skate park for safety concerns and supervision. Kem Green, 1000 Keaton, indicated she does not live in the neighborhood. She addressed the board and reported that she has been made aware there are 60 to 100 skate boarders in the city limits and there are 500 soccer players that commute to Gainesville to play soccer. She emphasized the need to utilize those funds for soccer fields which accommodates more families. She indicated skate parks are a nuisance. Her profession in real estate sales does include Quail Run and those streets in that neighborhood are very crowded. There are also kids who travel to Denton to play soccer at the YMCA in Denton. Ms. Green emphasized the importance of soccer fields. John Payne inquired on where did Ms. Green get the statistics that there is around 100 skate boarders in the city and the 500 soccer players. Ms. Green indicated that from Paul Eddleman ( chairman of the Parks Board) gave her that information. Her concern lack of supervision and safety. Karen Dill also advised the Board she participated in getting the signatures. She expressed that she was against the Skate Board and the noise this would create •• These kids that do skate board are now doing more dangerous things. Glenn Jason, 129 Maned Drive, also spoke against the skate park. The main concern was the residents do not want this in their neighborhood due to the traffic concern. This is not what the developer told them that the park would be when they bought their home. John Springer inquired on the liability issues that the City would incur. Rose Chavez, City Secretary, advised that she had contacted TML the city's insurance carrier, and they did advise that the skate park is a liability risk~ They will insurance the park; however, certain criteria needed to be established for safety issues to keep the city from being liable for injuries. Cecile Carson advised that last week in a conference she attended there were 6 cities addressing Graffti problems. Others had vandalism problems with the skate park. Thomas Muir indicated that the time frame for the skate park was 2008-2009 and the Comprehensive Master Plan will be completed by that time and it will address whether it is appropriate for the size, location and liability. Cecile Carson indicated stairs recommendation is to implement Phase I on the Park and the other items for that park be placed on hold until the Comprehensive Master Plan is completed. This would give the city an opportunity for Park Planning on a community perspective. Discussion regarding the Projects in Phase I, II and III. The fund allocation for the skate park was discussed as well as the need not to remove the project and to research a better location. John Payne emphasized that this project can be masked with safety issues and liability issues. He is questioning the intent of this entire issue, and whether it was due to the persons who will use the facility. Mr. Payne indicated that 54 of the signatures,on the petition came from 27 houses. He question the liability concern or whether the real issue was the class of people. The City has a public pool and that is a liability to the city. Discussion continued on not eliminating the Skate park but to find a location that would be centralized. This would allow time for research. Cecile Carson indicated there is a lot of needs and issues for Parks in the community. The Comprehensive Plan process does include a review of what is available and will include recommendations of what the city needs. This will include surveying the users to find out needs for a skate park and soccer fields or other park activities. The development of an implementation strategy on which years to implement which projects was discussed. Discussion continued regarding the skate park and how they can succeed. City of Sherman has a skate park and it is successful. Cecile advised that at the last Board meeting the members voted to approve funding these projects, which authorized them to forward their recommendation to City Council. The state laws require 4B to conduct one Public Hearing. Discussion and concerns were expressed on the fund request on allowing adequate funding to complete this project from start to finish and the different phases for each project. Discussion from the public regarding not having adequate notice. Discussion that at the last meeting the board approved the projects and the monies. The Board did not decide to spend the funds all in one year. There was a request at the last meeting that staff provide a time line on the completion of projects. ni ,Jy, ;. ·., J; ;:.;_ ?'• _iv,, . ~~•.·•.:-• l;.~• l,..f~ .; ~ ! _.,, :·• ... , .... ~ ' -~l ·,~.~,i: ;·,";.: .... -!: ?;.·•.; •. ~ • ; 1 ,4' ;"' .-,1: .'. ~-• , I : .-t .. \ . ~J' i t ' . : .. ,•'t -; / :''J· _i .. _i: ~· ;, 1-.. ·•Ir "';' • 1 ·.:~ I· •i , ~·t ,; l ~ t • ·., .. , ,. •.• f ,~ '.;.', ; ,', • ~ . ·: ~ t f:,·: 11 r ,,·. ·•·. . ~ Ii If .• f.! if ., ~'.4 __ . ' .. ':-~--_i,~ J' ,;•··•-,i Discussion on the time line for the projects, other future project requests, and financing for other these projects. Thomas Muir emphasized the importance of the Comprehensive Master Plan. Citizens continued to express rejection to the skate park in their neighborhood. President Armstrong continued with the Public Hearing on the Presbyterian ·church. Kem Green addressed the board in favor of this project. She inquired on the time frame on the funds allocated and on the bidding process. Discussion on the bidding process and bidders whose expertise needs tobe renovations of historical structures. The Board discussed what still needs to completed on the building. The last item on the Public Hearing was the analysis from Buxton Marketing. There was not any one for or speak against this project. President Armstrong declared public hearing closed. 3. Discus and Consider By-Law Amendments. Cecile Carson addressed this item and advised that in a review of the bylaws they do not reflect dates for actions to occur. Ms. Carson advised that in Section IV -4.05 -it currently indicates a specific date and time for their meetings. Ms. Carson suggested that this be omitted from the by-laws since meetings may vary. She also suggested the annual meeting be changed to July which coincides with the City Council board appointments. The officers who serve for a one year term would then serve from July through July of each year. The terms of the member are for two years and can they serve for an unlimited time. Officers serve one year term. Discussed officers were appointed last year. Motion was made by John Payne to adopt the Amendments as recommended. Seconded by Thomas Muir. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Review Financials President Armstrong discussed the financials with the members. 5. List of Future Agenda Items • a. John Payne indica~ed that if they are paying somebody to take care of this Board at a $100.00 a month, and that he signs the checks, that the members need to have in their possession a copy of those minutes from the previous meeting and financials. He understood that there was a problem with the City Secretary last month but ;t makes perfect sense to him. City Secretary indicated that minutes have always been presented to the board and not having them was due to circumstances. She will make sure every month that the minutes and financials will be in their packets. b. John Springer indicated that at the last meeting they had one item that was deleted, which was $5,000 to UNT. Mr. Springer indicated years ago when he was with the school system in the department of special education they contracted with the University of North for services for two years. The benefit they received in services was excellent. He felt it was wise to spend the $5,000 dollars for a foot in the door at the University. He emphasized that it would benefit Sanger. Nel,Armstrong indicated that she understood that this market analysis that Buxton Marketing was conducting was similar to this. Cecile Carson indicated UNT was purposing to conduct an analysis on incentive policies which would be different. There would be an opportunity to redefine this. Beverly Branch asked if a representative from the University ~ould come and visit with the board on what they can do. Ms. Carson indicated that she can certainly bring someone to discuss this with the board. She also indicated this would promote free publicity for the city. Discussion followed on having a City website and possibly posting agendas on the Chamber Website. Discussed the staff is currently trying ,.to get a City Website in place and posting agendas on the Chamber Website is not possible at this time due to staffing . .. We, the residents of Quail Run Subdivision, are NOT in favor of the skate board portion of the proposed park in ' our neighborhood because of the following reasons: 1. The skate board park should not be in a neighborhood, but be more centrally located in the city for all city residents to use; 2. The increased vehicle and foot traffic (we have many small children playing in our neighborhood and ) vehicles already line the streets, decreasing visibility); 3. There is no proposed supervision for those using the skate board park; 4. Increased noise; 5. The money allotted for the skate board park in our neighborhood could be better spent on other park facilities a. North Denton already has a skate boarding park b. A skate park serves a very narrow section of the community and Sanger has too few facilities for even the general population. 6. We have been neither officially informed nor asked our opinions concerning the park. i NAME -First and Last f: ~d~y-- .-4 M ~ t< 1< 0 t1 oy1J1 /\ [ 5:/ A Nl,.t f\? 1 _;;Ju c/LcY2..-s Ce,._£~,,, / ~c1U,,,(_ 19 [20 21 I I ADDRESS if 3/o Ot=mZ-: J{Lu r0 012_,. 3\~ 17e€./ Q.o" Dr . 3 r 7 Deel? 12. uP?D/l_ 3 13 Deer Ru,,., £)r. We, lhe residents of Quail Run Subdivision, are NOT in favor of the skate board portion of the proposed park in f · our neighborhood because of the following reasons: 1. The skate board park should not be in a neighborhood, but be more centrally located in the city for all city residents to use; 2. The increased vehicle and foot traffic (we have many small children playing in our neighborhood and ) vehicles already line the streets, decreasing visibility); 3. There is no proposed supervision for those using the skate board park; 4. Increased noise; 5. The money allotted for the skate board park in our neighborhood could be better spent on other park facilities a.· North Denton already has a skate boarding park b. A skate park serves a very narrow section of the community and Sanger has too few facilities for even the general population. 6. We have been neither officially informed nor asked our opinions concerning the park. I NAME -First and Last I 2 3 c~s _l.L-~,___J_~~~---- 6 7 I \ I / l 3 , J . ft? [to. I {J ~ ... ~V, lX 7bU'2 J~,5 1ea1. -f<d . ..£Mg:u, , -d 162kk> I elJ !Ml... -/d.. ~-ell tX'. 7h2fob 1°5 Teed (Zd. 'X1,Q8£C) rx Jv 7-(e(p io s f~M 'ed ✓ S~«, 'Tt: J"Z(Q(p /$?}! s' Gtsf st 59/t ✓Qf,1 TY 76~ {) r/ 1so::;. Ev~Jt st_;.;~ ·r-x ¼.zv I I I I I 1 We, ·the residents of Quail Run Subdivision, are NOT in favor of the skate board portion of the proposed park in f · our neighborhood because of the following reasons: 1. The skate board park should not be in a neighborhood, but be more centrally located in the city for all city residents to use; 2. The increased vehicle and foot traffic (we have many small children playing in our neighborhood and ) vehicles already line the streets, decrea~!ng visibility); 3. There is no proposed supervision for those using the skate board park; 4.i_,lncreased noise; ;;. The money allotted for the skate board park in our neighborhood could be better spent on other park facilities a. North Denton already has a skate boarding park b. A skate park serves a very narrow section of the community and Sanger has too few facilities for even the general population. 6. We have been neither officially informed nor asked our opinions concerning the park. NAME -First and Last I ADDRESS ~ 1 °3c>~ Q4c1 I Cu.s..1,ty 6 7 [11 12 13 14 15 16 18 ' We, ·the residents of Quail Run Subdivision, are NOT in favor of the skate board portion of the proposed park in f · our ~eighborhood because of the following reasons: 1. The skate board park should not be in a neighborhood, but be more centrally located in the city for all city residents to use; 2. The increased vehicle and foot traffic (we have many small children playing in our neighborhood and ) vehicles already line the streets, decreasing visibility}; 3. There is no proposed supervision for those using the skate board park; 4. Increased noise; 5. The money allotted for the skate board park in our neighborhood could be better spent on other park facilities a. North Denton already has a skate boarding park b. A skate park serves a very narrow section of the community and Sanger has too few facilities for even the general population. 6. We have been neither officially informed nor asked our opinions concerning the park. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 -~23:__ _________ _ 24 25 I ADDRESS i /2f /'J444<d £>«7 7626"~· 1 z, 1 ma.o ed Q r .San8er ,lti.t,. I t2 7 ,1(4-rt t'cl 7) /.-., . 54:tt1 4C 7 {pd4 . /J.. tj []7.a l.lJ1(( rr1'vf ~a«;f~ ](fa.t.fl, I 2--j f U tt: N c o /J /2 , 7 MfE?,16 L 6 /4 24 ffl!i11Gi . 7J r :Jif:#1: 1tJlia l2-5 ~Vl~l) \)f(. s\q Vlje? ,b?{tt; ) J} (1Af{f' D DI(-(r:lHOvf 7L:xl? \ Q_ l£i \):::\G 02,\ b:2, S::.nser tle~I,, _la~ 1110ned Pr, &~_,ec 7~b /1r.--~4/l/et2 ~·t <,,j,<y,x 2t-~?-?' / 2 ') £..1JU<tJJcr.c k 5-r 5nJt)¼Jt-7bZ6b v > i 3,$" f2._,,-.)c-,~;::::. Sr 5,:),-J&G{L 7bl..bb . , We, the residents of Quail Run Subdivision, are ttQ.! in favor of the skate board portion of the proposed park in , ' our neighborhood because of the following reasons: 1. The skate board park should not be in a neighborhood, but be more centrally located in the city for all city residents to use; 2. The increased vehicle and foot traffic {we have many small children playing in our neighborhood and ) vehicles already line the streets, decreasing visibility}; 3. There is no proposed supervision for those using the skate board park; 4. Increased noise; 5. The money allotted for the skate board park in our neighborhood could be better spent on other park facilities a. North Denton already has a skate boarding park b. A skate park serves a very narrow section of the community and Sanger has too few facilities for even the general population. 6. We have been neither officially informed nor asked our opinions concerning the park. I ADDRESS 3 4 5 (6 ...!.7~-L~_.L!,Ll..!;~~::::::u;~~J.:.::!~=L--- 8 9 [10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 We, the residents of Quail Run Subdivision, are NOT in favor of the skate board portion of the proposed park in , · our neighborhood because of the following reasons: 1. The skate board park should not be in a neighborhood, but be more centrally located in the city for all city residents to. use; 2. The increased vehicle and foot traffic (we have many small children playing in our neighborhood and ) vehicles already line the streets, decreasing visibility); 3. There is no proposed supervision for those using the skate board park; 4. Increased noise; 5. The money allotted for the skate board park in our neighborhood could be better spent on other park facilities a. North Denton already has a skate boarding park b. A skate park serves a very narrow section of the community and Sanger has too few facilities for even the general population. 6. We have been neither officially informed nor asked our opinions concerning the park. r_:,,_1 ~~444---+...PP.~lr'-r---- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 .we; the residents of Quail Run Subdivision, are ttQI in favor of the skate board portion of the proposed park in • 1 • our neighborhood because of the following reasons: 1. The skate board park should not be in a neighborhood, but be more centrally located in the city for all city residents to use; 2. The increased vehicle and foot traffic (we have many small children playing in our neighborhood and) vehicles already line the streets, decreasing visibility}; 3. There is no proposed supervision for those using the skate board park; 4. Increased noise; , 5. The money allotted for the skate board park in our neighborhood could be better spent on other park facilities a. North Denton already has a skate boarding park b. A skate park serves a very narrow section of the community and Sanger has· too few facilities for even the general population. 6. We have been neither officially informed nor asked our opinions concerning the park. NAME -First and Last I I ADDRESS f 1 '-./1 Su.-v Cc_ 4!, t. r-=-2 L o l'l-r c c. ~k. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 -23 24 25 - MEMO Date: August 31, 2006 To: 4B Board Members Fr: Rose Chavez, City Secretary/ Assistant City Manager Re: CD Renewal Enclosed is the,interest payment notice indicating that September I, 2006, CD#5006669 will earn $3,163.39 interest. The renewal rate will be 7.50%. The financial reports do not reflect the interest. ,·' SANGER BANK 501 N STEMMONS SANGER TX 76266 CITY OF SANGER SANGER TEXAS DEVELOPMENT BOX 1729 SANGER, TX 76266 INTEREST PAYMENT NOTICE CUSTOMER ACCOUNT 000005006669 0005006669 OFFICER CK ACCOUNT NUMBER 0005006669 IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,163.39 WIJ..{ BE INTEREST EARNED ON YOUR CERTIFICATE OF DEPOS~tJ-S-ftHtt~BER 000005006669 ADDED TO YOUR ACCOUNT BALANCE ON 09/01/06. THE 1tt"AN'e~YOUR ACCOUNT WILL $533,461.10. Q 7. J i:J, 1o BE Q 7. 5D IJ~cJl -·· CUSTOMER# 000005006669 0005006669 CITY OF SANGER SANGER TEXAS DEVELOPMENT l I -· ---- NOTICE DATE 08/18/06 BRANCH# 0001 TERM 0030D FREQ 0030D NEXT MATURES 09/01/06 8-31-2006 04:18 PM 42 -4B CORPORATION ASSETS ACCOUNT NO# TITLE CASH MONEY MARKET 4B CD#6669 RECEIVABLE-OTHER DUE FROM GEN. FUND 00-1010 00-1012 00-1053 00-1060 00-1062 AMT TO BE PROVIDED ~·OR L-T-D , LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE 00-2201 N/P GNB 00-3020 FUND BALANCE REVENUES EXPENSES ,. 00-4425 00-4800 00-4940 00-4985 76-5200 76-5210 76-5215 76-5220 76-5225 76-5410 76-5420 76-5450 76-6500 STATE SALES TAX INTEREST INCOME DONATIONS TRANFERS OUT TO 4B/PARK EXP CHECK CHARGES OFFICE SUPPLIES TRAVEL & REGISTRATIONS DUES PUBLICATIONS/SUBSCRIPTIONS INSURANCE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES ENGINEERING FEES PROJECTS ***TOTALS*** C I T Y O F S A N G E R TRIAL BALANCE AS OF: AUGUST 31ST, 2006 **** MONTH TO DATE**** DEBITS 20,670.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 27,000.00 47,770.68 CREDITS 20,835.43 24,003.15 2,932.10 47,770.68CR ***** YEAR TO DATE***** DEBITS 21,930.59 530,297.71 17,704.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,100.00 0.00 177,299.42 748,332.23 CREDITS 508,289.89 212,177.12 27,865.22 748,332.23CR PAGE: 1 8-31-2006 04:32 PM 42 -4B CORPORATION C I T Y O F S A N G E R FINANCIAL STATEMENT CURRENT BUDGET AS OF: AUGUST 31ST, 2006 CURRENT PERIOD Y-T-D ACTUAL % OF BUDGET Y-T-D ENCUMB. PAGE: 1 BUDGET BALANCE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REVENUE SUMMARY 4B REVENUES *** TOTAL REVENUES *** EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 76-4B EXPENSES *** TOTAL EXPENDITURES*** ** REVENUES OVER(UNDER) EXPENDITURES** TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) - 220,000.00 220,000.00 181,800.00 181,800.00 38,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26,935.25 26,935.25 27,100.00 27,100.00 164. 75) o.oo 0.00 o.oo 240,042.34 240,042.34 178,399.42 178,399.42 61,642.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 109 .11 109 .11 98.13 98.13 161. 37 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20,042.34) 20,042.34) 3,400.58 3,400.58 23,442.92) 0.00 0.00 0.00 8-31-2006 04:32 PM C I T Y 0 F SANG E R PAGE: 2 FINANCIAL STATEMENT AS OF: AUGUST 31ST, 2006 42 -4B CORPORATION UES CURRENT CURRENT Y-T-D % OF Y-T-D BUDGET BUDGET PERIOD ACTUAL BUDGET ENCUMB. BALANCE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REVENUES 4B REVENUES 00-4425 STATE SALES TAX 00-4800 INTEREST INCOME 00-4940 DONATIONS TOTAL 4B REVENUES *** TOTAL REVENUES *** 220,000.00 24,003.15 0.00 2,932.10 0.00 0.00 220,000.00 26,935.25 220,000.00 26,935.25 --------------==========;:;:;=== 212,177.12 96.44 0.00 7,822.88 27,865.22 0.00 0.00 27,865.22} 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 240,042.34 109 .11 0.00 20,042.34) 240,042.34 109 .11 0.00 20,042.34} ============== =============--------------- 8-31-2006 04:32 PM 42 -4B CORPORATION 1 00-NON-DEPARTMENTAL TMENT EXPENDITURES *** DEPARTMENT TOTAL *** CITY OF SANGER FINANCIAL STATEMENT CURRENT BUDGET 0.00 AS OF: AUGUST 31ST, 2006 CURRENT PERIOD 0.00 Y-T-D ACTUAL 0.00 % OF BUDGET 0.00 Y-T-D ENCUMB. 0.00 PAGE: 3 BUDGET BALANCE 0.00 8-31-2006 04:32 PM C I T Y 0 F SANG E R PAGE: 4 FINANCIAL STATEMENT AS OF: AUGUST 31ST, 2006 42 -4B CORPORATION 76-4B EXPENSES I '.TMENT EXPENDITURES CURRENT CURRENT Y-T-D % OF Y-T-D BUDGET BUDGET PERIOD ACTUAL BUDGET ENCUMB. BALANCE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 52-SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS 76-5200 CHECK CHARGES 76-5210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 76-5215 TRAVEL & REGISTRATIONS 76-5220 DUES 76-5225 PUBLICATIONS/SUBSCRIPTIONS TOTAL 52-SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS 54-CONTRACT SERVICES 76-5410 INSURANCE 76-5420 CONTRACTUAL 76-5450 ENGINEERING TOTAL 54-CONTRACT 65-PROJECTS 76-6500 PROJECTS TAL 65-PROJECTS SERVICES FEES SERVICES *** DEPARTMENT TOTAL *** *** TOTAL EXPENDITURES*** OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) *** END OF REPORT*** 0.00 200.00 500.00 250.00 200.00 1,150.00 100.00 28,500.00 0.00 28,600.00 152,050.00 152,050.00 181,800.00 181,800.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 1,100.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 1,100.00 27,000.00 177,299.42 27,000.00 177,299.42 27,100.00 178,399.42 27,100.00 178,399.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.86 0.00 3.85 116.61 116.61 98 .13 98 .13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 500.00 250.00 200.00 1,150.00 100.00 27,400.00 0.00 27,500.00 25,249.42) 25,249.42) 3,400.58 3,400.58 0.00 MEMO Date: September 1, 2006 To: 4B Board Members Fr: Rosalie Chavez, City Secretary/ Assistant City Manager Re: Proposed Budget 2006/2007 The City Manager failed to add the Economic Development Director's salary to Item #76-5420. He has been out sick the last two days. We will have a modified budget with that correction at the next meeting which will reflect changes in total expenditures and revenues. 7-13-2006 03:48 PM 42•-4B CORPORATION C I T Y O F S A N G E R DEPARTMENT HEAD BUDGET AS OF: JUNE,30TH, 2006 CURRENT BUDGET Y-T-D ACTUAL PAGE: 1 CITY SECRET ARY On'Q'f\'AI ~,- DE]?T. HEAD BUDGET "i\l ··,j, ,.-.i.. l..-UPY ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- REVENUE SUMMARY 4B REVENUES *** TOTAL REVENUES *** EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 76-4B EXPENSES *** TOTAL EXPENDITURES*** * REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXP.* 220,000.00 220,000.00 181,800.00 181,800.00 38,200.00 192,304.17 250,000.00 192,304.17 250,000.00 151,199.42 250,000.00 151,199.42 250,000.00 =============== 41,104.75 0.00 t 7-13-2006 03:48 PM 42 -4B CORPORATION R ~UES 4B REVENUES 00-4425 00-4800 00-4940 STATE SALES TAX INTEREST INCOME DONATIONS '** REVENUE CATEGORY TOTAL** *** TOTAL REVENUES *** C I T Y 0 F SANGER AS OF: DEPARTMENT HEAD BUDGET JUNE 30TH, CURRENT BUDGET 220,000.00 0.00 0.00 220,000.00 220,000.00 2006 Y-T-D ACTUAL 170,277.21 22,026.96 0.00 192,304.17 192,304.17 PAGE: DEPT. HEAD BUDGET 240,000.00 10,000.00 0.00 250,000.00 250,000.00 2 7-13-2006 03:48 PM 42 -4B CORPORATION 0 )N-DEPARTMENTAL 1 D~~ .. RTMENT EXPENDITURES C I T Y O F S A N G E R DEPARTMENT HEAD BUDGET , AS OF: JUNE 30TH, 2006 CURRENT BUDGET Y-T-D ACTUAL PAGE: DEPT. HEAD BUDGET 3 . . -- *** DEPARTMENT TOTAL *** 0. 001 0.00 0.00 .7-13-2006 03:48 PM 42 -4B CORPORATION 7 l EXPENSES D~--.RTMENT EXPENDITURES C I T Y O F S A N G E R DEPARTMENT HEAD BUDGET AS OF: JUNE 30TH, 2006 CURRENT BUDGET Y-T-D ACTUAL PAGE: DEPT. HEAD BUDGET 4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 52-SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS 76-5200, CHECK CHARGES 0.00 0.00 0.00 76-5210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 200.00 0.00 200.00 76-5215 TRAVEL & REGISTRATIO 500.00 o.oo 500.00 76-5220 DUES 250.00 0.00 250.00 76-5225 PUBLI.CATIONS / SUBSCRI 200.00 0.00 200.00 ** CATEGORY TOTAL** 1,150.00 0.00 1,150.00 54-CONTRACT SERVICES 76-5410 INSURANCE 100. 00 0.00 100.00 76-5420 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 28,500.00 900.00 1,200.00.:k' 76-5450 ENGINEERING FEES 0.00 0.00 0.00 ** CATEGORY TOTAL ** 28,600.00 900.00 1,300.00 65-PROJECTS 76-6500 PROJECTS 152,050.00 150,299.42 247,550.00 ** ~l\.TEGORY TOTAL** 152,050.00 150,299.42 247,550.00 ,; *** DEPARTMENT TOTAL *** 181,800.00 151,199.42 250,000.00 ============ =============- *** TOTAL EXPENDITURES *** 181,800.00 151,199.42 · 250,000.00 *** END OF REPORT*** *** TOTAL EXPENDITURES*** 0.00 0.00 0.00 • MEMO Date: September 1, 2006 To: 4B Board Members Fr: Rose Chavez, City Secretary/ Assistant City Manager Re: Reappointments At the August 21, 2006 City Council meeting, the Council reappointed all members for a two year term .