HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-25-04 Regular Meeting of La Porte Audit Committee2.
MINUTES OF THE LA PORTE AUDIT COMMITTEE
October 25, 2004
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Chuck Engelken at 5:00 p.m.
Members of Committee Present: Chairperson Chuck Engelken, Mayor Pro Tem Barry
Beasley and Councilmember Peter Griffiths
Members of Committee Absent: Howard Ebow
Members of City Executive Staff and City Employees Present: City Manager Debra
Feazelle, Assistant City Manager Cynthia Alexander, Assistant Finance Director
Michael Dolby, Assistant City Secretary Sharon Harris, Susan Kelley and Kathy Powell
2. Consider approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of La Porte Audit Committee Minutes
held on October 11, 2004.
Motion was made by Committee Member Beasley to approve the minutes as presented. A
second by Committee Member Peter Griffiths. The motion carried unanimously.
3. Discussion Items
o City Manager Debra Feazelle discussed an administrative fraud policy that would
be signed by all city employees.
Purchasing Manager Susan Kelley provided the Committee with a procurement
card presentation and a flow chart. A pilot program of using the cards was started
at the beginning of the year with the Parks and Recreation Department. The
program was successful, with a few more cards to be issued. Ms. Kelley provided
guidelines for usage of the procurement cards. Committee Member Beasley
questioned if the City would receive a rebate for utilizing the cards. Ms. Kelley
informed him the City would receive a check at the end of the year, with the
rebate going back into the general fund.
Assistant City Manager Cynthia Alexander reminded the Committee that the
name of the Committee will be changing to "Fiscal Affairs Committee".
4. Tax Resale Property
• •
Minutes of the La Porte Audit Committee — October 25, 2004
• Tax Manager Kathy Powell presented two bids for tax resale property to the
Committee for approval. Ms. Powell recommended that one of the bids be
approved and the other be rejected.
Motion was made by Committee Member Beasley to approve recommendation as
presented by Ms. Powell. A second by Committee Member Griffiths. The motion
carried unanimously.
5. Assistant Finance Director Michael Dolby presented the Committee with the Fourth
Quarter (FY 2004) Investment Report.
6. Assistant City Manager Cynthia Alexander presented the Committee with the Credit
Card Report.
7. The Committee had comments
8. Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was
adjourned at 5:36 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
��M&&4a
Martha A. Gillett, TRMC
City Secretary
Approved this Tday of �, 2006'
Chairperson Chuck Engelken
0 •
3.
DRAFT
1
1
' CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
' For the fiscal year ended
September 30, 2004
1
vil
Prepared by:
' Department of Finance
1
1
i
1
City of La Porte
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS
B198—
INTRODUCTORY SECTION
Letter of Transmittal
3
'
GFOA Certificate of Achievement
9
Organization Chart
10
List of Elected and Appointed Officials
11
FINANCIAL SECTION
Independent Auditors' Report
15
'
Management's Discussion and Analysis
17
Basic Financial Statements:
Government -wide Financial Statements:
Statement of Net Assets
27
'
Statement of Activities
28
Fund Financial Statements:
Balance Sheet — Governmental Funds
30
Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to
Statement of Net Assets
33
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in
1
Fund Balances — Governmental Funds
34
Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes
In Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities
36
'
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in
Fund Balances — Budget and Actual — General Fund
37
Statement of Net Assets — Proprietary Funds
38
Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in
Fund Net Assets — Proprietary Funds
40
Statement of Cash Flows — Proprietary Funds
42
Notes to the Financial Statements
45
'
Required Supplementary Information
69
Combining and Individual Fund Statements and Schedules:
Combining Balance Sheet — Nonmajor Governmental Funds
72
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and
Changes in Fund Balances — Nonmajor Governmental Funds
74
Schedules of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in
Fund Balances — Budget and Actual:
Debt Service Fund
78
Grant Special Revenue Fund
79
'
Community Investment Special Revenue Fund
80
Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax Sales Tax Special Revenue Fund
81
Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone One Special Revenue Fund
82
'
Capital Projects Fund
83
Transportation and Other Infrastructure Fund
84
1998 General Obligation Bonds Fund
85
2000 Certificate of Obligation Bonds Fund
86
2000 General Obligation Bonds Fund
87
2002 General Obligation Bonds Fund
88
i�
City of La Porte
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Supplementary Individual Fund Financial Statements and Schedules — General Fund
Schedule of Revenues — Budget and Actual
90
Schedule of Expenditures — Budget and Actual
91
Combining Financial Statements — Internal Service Funds:
Combining Statement of Net Assets
98
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Assets
99
Combining Statement of Cash Flows
100
Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds:
Schedule by Source
103
104
Schedule by Function and Activity
Schedule of Changes by Function and Activity
106
STATISTICAL SECTION
Government -wide information:
Government -wide Expenses by Function
108
Government -wide Revenues
108
Fund information
General Governmental Expenditures by Function
110
General Governmental Revenues by Source
112
Property Tax Levies and Collections
114
Property Tax Rates - Direct and Overlapping Governments
116
Ratio of Gross General Bonded Debt to Assessed Value and
Gross Bonded Debt Per Capita
119
Computation of Direct and Overlapping Debt
120
Ratio of Annual Debt Service Expenditures for General
Obligation Debt to Total General Expenditures
121
Revenue Bond Coverage - Water and Sewer Bonds
122
Assessed and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property
124
Principal Taxpayers
126
Demographic Statistics
127
Property Value, Construction and Bank Deposits
128
Miscellaneous Statistical Data
129
iv
1 0 •
iJ
1
1
INTRODUCTORY SECTION
1
H
1
1
1
1
1
L
OF .A A
_l oLa Porte
Established 1892
January 18, 2005
To the Honorable Mayor, Members of the- Governing Council, and Citizens of the City of La Porte, Texas:
' The Finance Department and City Manager's Office is pleased to submit the Comprehensive Annual Financial .
Report for the City of La Porte, Texas for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2004. This report is published
'to provide the City Council, City staff, our citizens, our bondholders and other interested parties with detailed
information concerning the financial condition and activities of the City government.
This report consists of management's representations concerning the finances of the City of La Porte.
' Consequently, management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of all of the
information presented in this report. To provide a reasonable basis for making these representations,
management of the City has established a comprehensive internal control framework that is designed both to
'protect the government's assets from loss, theft, or misuse and to compile sufficient reliable information for the
preparation of the City of La Porte's financial statements in conformity with GAAP. Because the cost of internal
controls should not outweigh. their benefits, the City of La Porte's comprehensive framework of internal controls
'has been designed to provide reasonable rather than absolute assurance that the financial statements will be
free from material misstatement. As management, we assert that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, this
financial report is complete and reliable in all material respects.
ill
1
The City of La Porte's financial statements have been audited by Null-Lairson, a firm of licensed certified public
accountants. The goal ' of the independent audit was to provide reasonable assurance that the financial
statements of the City of La Porte for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2004 are free of material
misstatement. The independent audit involved examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amount
and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by management; and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. The independent auditor
concluded, based upon the audit, that there was a reasonable basis for rendering an unqualified opinion that
the City of La Porte's financial statements for fiscal year ended September 30, 2004, are fairly presented in
conformity with GAAP. The independent auditor's report is presented as a component of the financial section
of this report.
'. - 604 W. Fairmont Pkwy. • La Porte, Texas 77571 • (281) 471-5020
The independent audit of the financial statements of the City of La Porte included a federally
mandated "Single Audit" designed to meet the special needs of federal grantor agencies. The
standards governing Single Audit engagements require the independent auditor to report not only
on the fair presentation of the financial statements, but also on the audited government's internal
controls and compliance with legal requirements, with special emphasis on internal controls and
legal requirements involving the administration of federal awards. These reports are available in
the City of La Porte's separately issued Single Audit Report.
GAAP requires that management provide a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis to
accompany the basic financial statements in the form of Management's Discussion and Analysis
(MD&A).. This letter of transmittal is designed to complement MD&A and should be read in
conjunction with it. The City of La Porte's MD&A can be found immediately following the report of
the independent auditors.
Profile of the City
The City of La Porte, incorporated in 1892, is located in the southeast quadrant of Harris County
and is bounded on the north by the Houston ship channel, on the east by Galveston Bay, and the
south by the Bayport channel. The City of La Porte currently encompasses 19 square miles and
serves a population of 33,712.
The City is a home rule city operating under the Council -Manager form of government. Policy -
making and legislative authority are vested in a governing council consisting of the mayor and eight
other members. The city council is responsible, among other things, for passing ordinances,
adopting the budget, appointing committees, and hiring both the City's Manager and Attorney. The
City's Manager is responsible for carrying out the policies and ordinances of the City Council, for
overseeing the day-to-day operations of the City, and for appointing the heads of various
departments. The Council is elected on a non -partisan basis. The Mayor and Council members
serve three-year staggered terms. Six of the council members are elected by district. The Mayor
and the two remaining council members are elected at large.
The City of La Porte provides a full range- of services, including police and fire protection, the -
construction and maintenance of streets and other infrastructure, and recreational activities and
cultural events. Certain services are provided through a legally separate Water Authority, which
functions, as a blended component unit and in essence, is a department of the City of La Porte,
and therefore has been included as an integral part of the City of La Porte's financial statements.
Additional information on the Water Authority can be found in Note 1.B. of the notes to the financial
statements.
The City's accounting records for general governmental operations are maintained on a modified
accrual basis, with the revenues being recorded when available and measurable and expenditures
being recorded when the services or goods are received and the liabilities are incurred.
Accounting records for the City's utilities and other proprietary activities .are -maintained on the
accrual basis.
The annual budget serves as the foundation for the City of La Porte's financial planning and
control. Budgetary control has been established at the individual department level. All agencies of
the City of La Porte are required to submit requests for appropriation to the City's Manager on or
before August the 15'h of each year. The City's Manager uses these requests as the starting point
4
' for developing a proposed budget. The City's manager then presents this proposed budget to
council for review prior to September 30. The council is required to hold a public hearing on the
proposed budget and to adopt a final budget by no later than September 30, the close of the City of
La Porte's fiscal year. The appropriated budget is prepared by fund, function (e.g., public safety),
and department (e.g., police). The City Manager must approve transfers of appropriations within a
department. Transfers of appropriations between departments, however require the special
approval of the city council. Budget -to -actual comparisons are provided in financial reports for
each individual governmental fund for which an appropriated annual budget has been adopted.
For the general fund, this comparison is presented on page 37 as part of the basic financial
statements for the governmental funds. For governmental funds, other than the general fund, with
' appropriated annual budgets, this comparison is presented in the governmental fund subsection of
this report, which starts on page 78.
IFactors Affecting Financial Condition
The information presented in the financial statements is perhaps best understood when it is
considered from the broader perspective of the specific environment within which the City of La
Porte operates.
Local economy. The City of La Porte is located in the southeast quadrant of Harris County, which
is a 1,723 square mile county is a leading oil, gas and petrochemical areas. It has more than
3,200 manufacturing plants, the nation's largest concentration of petrochemical plants, the third
largest United States seaport, and is a corporation management center. A significant part of the
County's major employers, manufacturers, education and financial institutions are located in
Houston, the County seat. The Texas Medical Center, located in Harris County, is one of the
' nation's largest, providing medical care and educational opportunities. The county's 64 hospitals
have over 17,000 beds of which 4,600 are in the Texas Medical Center. Higher education facilities
includes: University of Houston, Rice University, Texas Southern University, St. Thomas University
I
and Houston Baptist College, all offering full four-year as well as postgraduate programs. The
Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center is also located here.
Located some 20 miles southeast of Houston on Galveston Bay in Harris County are the three
communities that make up the La Porte Bayshore Area: La Porte, Morgan's Point and Shoreacres.
The area has a combined population of approximately 40,000. Though much of the image of this
' area is industrial, the La Porte-Bayshore area is still characterized by an expanse of resort homes.
Because of this, and the metropolitan advantages of Houston, La Porte is one of the few
communities in the Gulf Coast area that offers this favorable combination.
11
1
1
Future planning. The La Porte 2020 Comprehensive Plan is a 20-year master plan adopted by
the City Council to guide policy decisions relating to the physical and economic development of the
community. In general, the plan indicates how the community desires to develop and redevelop
over the course of the next twenty years. The comprehensive plan is a physical plan; it is long-
range, comprehensive, and states the goals, objectives and policies of the local government. The
comprehensive plan provides clear direction through specific statements of action to achieve the
desired results envisioned by citizens and the leadership of the community.
5
The essential objectives of the comprehensive plan are as follows:
❖ It is a plan to guide the future physical development and redevelopment of the community;
❖ The time frame is long, extending over a twenty-year horizon;
❖ It encompasses a large geographic area including the corporate limits and ETJ of the
community;
❖ It is general in nature, allowing some issues to be resolved and many decisions to be made;
❖ It articulates ideas in a framework of goals and objectives, policies and actions, and plans
and projects;
❖ Itis intended foremost, to serve as a continuing guide to decision -making, to provide a
common direction, and to provide stability as issues are addressed and future decisions are
made.
Residential Development. Neighborhoods are one of La Porte's greatest assets as they form a
foundation for a sound quality of life. The City is made up of several distinct neighborhood areas,
each with somewhat different physical characteristics such as the age of housing, street
configuration, and the sizes of structures and lots. Much of the City's overall image and identity is
due to the unique character of its neighborhoods, and these distinguishing features should therefore
be preserved. Neighborhoods that are safe, well maintained and have character will maintain
property values and thus maintain a sound neighborhood environment and a stable residential tax
base.
The attractive appearance and environmental quality of existing and future low -density residential
neighborhoods should be protected and improvements made where necessary to maintain the value
of properties and enhance the quality of life. As the city continues to develop it is important that the
integrity of the neighborhoods is preserved and the value and enjoyment of property is maintained
and enhanced.
Goals for residential development:
❖ Consider programs to revitalize and rehabilitate existing housing where needed.
❖ Meet the future housing needs by providing fora variety of housing options.
❖ Encourage the rehabilitation or replacement of substandard housing.
❖ Promote a standard of home ownership encouraging well -maintained residential properties.
❖ Preserve the integrity of existing neighborhoods and create livable and safe neighborhood
environments.
❖ Protect the attractive appearance and environmental quality of existing neighborhoods and
make necessary improvements to maintain the value of properties and enhance the quality
of life.
Beautification and Conservation. Citizens have expressed great interest for enhancing the
visual appearance of La Porte and the redevelopment and reinvestment in Downtown, along major
corridors, and in nonresidential areas.- Through public involvement it is apparent that citizens
visualize attractive shopping centers, livable neighborhoods, landscaped roadways, pleasant
places to walk, and an enhanced quality of life. They want successful shopping areas that appeal
to shoppers. They see the opportunities in the downtown to create a destination that combines a
lively entertainment district in a historically significant area, retail stores interspersed with
restaurants and professional offices and a blend of residential units as well.
0
I�
IGoals for Beautification:
❖ Improve the community character to make it a more desirable place to live, work, and visit.
❖ Improve the aesthetic visual environment through enhancement of site design, signage,
roadways,parking areas, open space, and landscaping.
❖ Invest in Downtown to establish a vibrant mix of places to work, live, and visit, with shops,
restaurants, entertainment, and a variety of dwelling units.
Redevelopment Strategy. Urban redevelopment efforts require cooperative action to encourage
' new and sustained private investment and to provide supporting rehabilitation of public
infrastructure. A key part of the process is determining what strategic actions the community
should take to achieve its redevelopment goals and objectives. Successful redevelopment will
often require cooperation and coordination between agencies at different levels of government as
well as non-profit community organizations. This should include coordination of physical
improvements with social service programs, which aim to enhance the health and economic
capacity of residents in targeted neighborhoods.
Redevelopment Goals:
❖ Stabilize and improve the quality of neighborhoods and other areas in decline by attracting
renewed private investment activity.
❖ Revitalize the City's historic downtown area.
Cash management policies and practices. Cash temporarily idle during the year was invested
in demand deposits and obligations of the U.S. Treasury. The maturities of the investments range
from 30 days to 2 years, with an average maturity of 8 months. The average yield on investments
was 1.35% for the government. Investment income includes appreciation in the fair value of
investments. Increases in fair value during the current year, however, do not necessarily represent
trends that will continue; nor is it always possible to realize such amounts, especially in the case of
temporary changes in the fair value of investments that the City intends to hold to maturity.
Pension and other post employment benefits. The City of La Porte sponsors a cost sharing
multiple employer pension plan for its emergency services personnel. Each year, an independent
actuary engaged by the pension plan calculates the amount of the annual contribution that the City
' of La Porte must make to the pension plan to ensure that the plan will be able to fully meets its
obligations to retired employees on a timely basis.
1
The City of La Porte also provides pension benefits for its non emergency services employees.
These benefits are provided through a state-wide plan managed by Texas Municipal Retirement
System (TMRS). The City of La Porte has no obligation in connection with employee benefits
offered through this plan beyond its annual contractual payment to TMRS.
The City of La Porte also provides postretirement health and dental care benefits for certain
retirees and their dependents. As of the end of the current fiscal year, there were 49 retired
employees receiving these benefits.
Additional information on the City of La Porte's pension arrangements and post employment
benefits can be found in Notes 6 and 11 in the notes to the financial statements.
1
VA
Awards and Acknowledgements I
The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in
Financial Reporting to the City for its comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended September '
30, 2003. This was the twenty-third consecutive year that the City has received this prestigious award. In order
to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, the City published an easily readable and efficiently organized
comprehensive annual financial report. This report satisfied both generally accepted accounting principles and
applicable legal requirements.
A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe that our current comprehensive
annual financial report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program's requirements and are '
submitting it to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate.
In addition, the government also received the GFOA's Distinguished Budget Award for its annual budget
document. In order to qualify for the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award, the government's budget
document was judged to be proficient in several categories, including as a policy document, a financial plan, an
operations guide, and a communications device.
The preparation of this report would not have been possible without the efficient and dedicated services of the
entire staff of the finance and administration department. We would like to express our appreciation to ail
members of the department who assisted and contributed to the preparation of this report. Credit also must be
given to the mayor and city council for their unfailing support for maintaining the highest standards of
professionalism in the management of the City of La Porte's finances.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra Brooks Feazelle Cynthia Alexander
City Manager Assistant City Manager
1
1
1
Certificate of achievement
1
1
F,
Assistant City Manager
Public Works III Parks &
*Interim
Golf Course
CITY OF LA PORTE
ORGANIZATION CHART
City Manager 11
FirdEMS III Police III Human Resources III Planning
re xps
j Assistant City Manager
Finance Utility Billing MIS
BJ%c w Date: 091OL2003
Purchasing
-imI = = = = i = i M = r = = M = M ! M
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CITY OF LA PORTE
LIST OF ELECTED OFFICIALS
PETER GRIFFITHS
COUNCIL PERSON 'f '
AT LARGE A
MICHAEL MOSTEIT
COUNCIL PERSON
DISTRICT 1
HOWARD EBOW
COUNCIL PERSON
DISTRICT 3
LOUIS RIGBY
COUNCIL PERSON
DISTRICT 5
ALTON PORTER
MAYOR
11
BARRY BEASLEY
MAYOR PRO TEM
AT LARGE B
CHUCK ENGELKEN
COUNCIL PERSON
DISTRICT 2
TOMMY MOSER
COUNCIL PERSON
DISTRICT 4
a;
MIKE CLAUSEN
COUNCIL PERSON
DISTRICT 6
12
1
1
FINANCIAL SECTION
13
14
1 • AL
' 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1515 Null s Urson
Houston, TX 77046
(713) 621-1515 CERTIFIED PUBIICACCOUNTANTS
' Fax: (713) 621-1570 PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Draft
Independent Auditors' Report
To the Honorable Mayor and Members
' of the City Council
City of LaPorte, Texas
11
One Sugar Creek Blvd., Suite 1150
Sugar Land, TX 77478
(281)242-8600
Fax: (281) 242-7333
' We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the
business -type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City
of La Porte, Texas (the City), as of and for the year ended September 30, 2004, which
collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.
These financial statements are the responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility is
' to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United
' States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government
Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also
includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
' management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that
our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions.
' In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects,
the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each
major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of La Porte, Texas, as of
September 30, 2004, and the respective changes in financial position and cash flows, where
applicable, thereof for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America.
1
' MEMBERS: AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, TEXAS SOCIETY OF CERTIFIM PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS,
CPA ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL, INC. WITH ASSOCIATED OFFICES IN PRINCIPAL U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL CITIES
1
To the Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Council
City of LaPorte, Texas
In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated
January 19, 2005, on our consideration of the City's internal control over financial
reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions or laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants. That report, which has been issued separately from this document,
is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing
Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considering the results of
our audit.
The Management's Discussion and Analysis, budgetary comparison information, and
pension information located in the Financial Section of this document are not a required
part of the basic- financial statements but are supplementary information required by
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. We have
applied certain limited procedures, which consisted principally of inquiries of
management regarding. the methods of measurement and. presentation of the
supplementary information. However, we did not audit the information and express no
opinion on it.
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements
that collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements. The introductory section,
combining and individual find statements and schedules and statistical tables are
presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic
financial statements. The combining and individual find statements and schedules have
been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial
statements and, in our opinion, are fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the
basic financial statements taken as a whole. The introductory section and statistical tables
have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic
financial statements and, accordingly, we express no- opinion on them.
2
1 • •
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
1
1
Management's Discussion and Analysis
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
As management of the City of La Porte, we offer readers of the City's financial statements this narrative
overview and analysis of the financial activities of the City for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2004. We
encourage readers to consider the information presented here in conjunction with additional information that
we have furnished in our letter of transmittal, which can be found on pages 3-8 of this report.
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
• The assets of the City of La Porte exceeded its liabilities at the close of the most recent fiscal year by
$87,019,858 (net assets). Of this amount, $28,662,825 (unrestricted net assets) may be used to
meet the government's ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors in accordance with the City's
fund designation and fiscal policies.
• The government's total net assets decreased by $1,105,883.
' • As of the close of the current fiscal year, the City of La Porte's governmental funds reported
combined ending fund balances of $23,143,855. Of this amount, $15,471,748 (67%) is unreserved
and available for use within the City's designation and policies.
' • At the end of the current fiscal year, unreserved fund balance for the general fund was $6,632,833
(28%) of the total general fund expenditures.
' OVERVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1
1
1
1
This discussion and analysis are intended to serve as an introduction of the City's basic financial statements.
The City's basic financial statements are comprised of three components: 1) government -wide financial
statements, 2) fund financial statements and 3) notes to the financial statements. This report also contains
other supplementary information in addition to the basic financial statements themselves.
Government -wide financial statements — The government -wide financial statements are designed to
provide readers with a broad overview of the City's finances, in a manner similar to a private -sector business.
The Statement of Net Assets presents information on all of the City's assets and liabilities, with the difference
between the two reported as net assets. Over time, increases or decreases in net assets may serve as a
useful indicator of whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating.
The Statement of Activities presents information showing how the City's net assets changed during the fiscal
year. All changes in net assets are reported when the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs,
regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement
for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned
but unused compensated absences).
Both of the government -wide financial statements report functions of the City that are principally supported
by taxes and intergovernmental revenues (governmental activities) from functions that are intended to
recover all or a significant portion of their costs through user fees and charges (business -type activities).
The governmental activities of the City include general government, public safety, public works, health and
sanitation and culture and recreation. The business -type activities of the City include the Water and Sewer
Utilities, Airport, La Porte Area Water Authority, Sylvan Beach Convention Center and Bay Forest Golf
Course operations.
The government -wide financial statements can be found on pages 27-29 of this report.
17
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Management's Discussion and Analysis
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Fund financial statements - A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over
resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City, like other state and local
governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance -related legal
requirements. All of the funds of the City can be divided into two categories - governmental funds and
proprietary funds.
Governmental funds - Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported
as governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. However, unlike the government -
wide financial statements, governmental fund financial statements focus on current sources and uses of
spendable resources, as well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year.
Such information may be useful in evaluating a government's near -term financing requirements.
Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements,
it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented
for governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. By doing so, readers may better
understand the long-term impact of the government's near -term financing decisions. Both the governmental
funds balance sheet and the governmental fund statements of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund
balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and
governmental activities.
The City maintains 13 governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the Governmental Fund
Balance Sheet and in the Governmental Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund
Balances for the General, Debt Service and Section 413 Sales Tax, all of which are considered to be major
funds. Data from the other 10 governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation.
Individual fund data for each of these non -major governmental funds is provided in the form of combining
statements elsewhere in this report.
The basic governmental fund financial statements can be found on pages 30-37 of this report.
Proprietary funds - The City maintains two types of proprietary funds. Proprietary funds are used to report
the same functions presented as business -type activities in the government -wide financial statements. The
City uses proprietary funds to account for its utilities, airport, water authority, convention center and golf
course. Internal service funds are an accounting device used to accumulate and allocate costs internally
among the City's various functions. The City uses its internal service funds to account for its motor pool
services, technology services and employee health insurance program. Because these services
predominantly benefit governmental rather than- business -type functions, they have been included within
governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements.
Proprietary funds provide the same type of information as the government -wide financial statements, only in
more detail. The proprietary fund financial statements provide separate information for the Utility and La
Porte Area Water Authority funds since they are considered to be major funds of the City. Because the
Airport, Bay Forest Golf Course and Sylvan Beach Convention Center are the only remaining proprietary
funds, they are being presented as major funds even though they do not meet the criteria of a major fund
established in Government Accounting Standard Board (GASB) Statement No. 34. All internal service funds
are combined into a single aggregated presentation in the proprietary fund financial statements. Individual
fund data for the internal service funds is provided in the form of combining statements elsewhere in this
report.
The basic proprietary fund financial statements can be found on pages 38-43 of this report.
Notes to the Financial Statements - The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full
understanding of the data provided in the government -wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the
financial statements can be found on pages 45-68 of this report.
Ii K
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Management's Discussion and Analysis
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
' Other Information - In addition to the basic financial statements and accompanying notes, this report also
presents certain required supplementary information concerning the City's progress in funding its obligation
to provide pension benefits to its employees. Required supplementary information can be found on page 69
of this report.
The combining statements referred to earlier in connection with nonmajor governmental funds and internal
service funds are presented immediately following the required supplementary information on pensions.
' Combining fund statements and schedules can be found on pages 72-88 of this report.
GOVERNMENT -WIDE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
As noted earlier, net assets may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government's financial position. In
the case of the City of La Porte, assets exceeded liabilities by $87,019,858 at the close of the fiscal year.
By far the largest portion of the City's net assets $49,509,884 (57%) reflects its investment in capital assets
(e.g., land, buildings, machinery, equipment, improvements, construction in progress, and infrastructure),
less any related debt used to acquire those assets that are still outstanding. The City uses these capital
assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending.
Although the City's investment in its capital assets is reported net of related debt, it should be noted that the
resources needed to repay this debt must be provided from other sources, since the capital assets
' themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities.
City of La Porte's Net Assets
1
Governmental
Activities
Business -Type
Activities
Total
2004
2003
2004
2003
2004
2003
Current and other assets
$ 26,149,467
$ 33,982,205
$ 7,806,711 $
9,172,756
$ 33,956,178
$ 43,154,961
Capital assets
39,705,979
34,110,595
35,193,134
34,110,595
74,899,113
Total Assets
26,149,467
73,688,184
41,917,306
44,365,890
68,066,773
118,054,074
'
Long term liabilities
-
15,775,718
7,507,468
8,500,496
7,507,468
24,276,214
Other liabilities
6,822,322
4,754,482
2,108,756
2,003,520
8,929,078
6,758,002
Total Liabilities
6,822,322
20,530,200
9,614,224
10,504,016
16,436,546
31,034,216
Net Assets:
n
1
Invested in capital assets,
net of related debt
Restricted
Unrestricted
Total Net Assets
23,400,108 3,268,462 26,109,776 3,268,462 49,509,884
5,804,419 3,662,800 3,042,730 3,662,800 8,847,149
19,327,145 23,953,457 25,375,044 4,709,368 44,702,189 28,882,825
$ 19,327,145 $ 53,157,984 $ 32,306,308 $ 33,881,874 $ 51,633,451 $ 87,019,858
An additional portion of the City's net assets $8,847,149 (10%) represents resources that are subject to
external restrictions on how they may be used. The remaining balance of unrestricted net assets of
$28,662,825 (33%) may be used to meet the government's ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors.
As of September 30, 2004, the City is able to report positive balances in all three categories of net assets,
both for the government as a whole, as well as for its separate categories - governmental and business -type
activities.
19
• 0 1
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Management's Discussion and Analysis
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Analysis of the City's Operations — the following table provides a summary of the City's operations for the
year ended September 30, 2004, with comparative totals for year ended September 30, 2003.
Governmental activities decreased the City of La Porte's net assets by $256,003, accounting for 23% of the
total decline in net assets. Business -type activities decreased the City's net assets by $849,880, accounting
for 77% of the total decline in net assets.
City of La Porte's Changes in Not Assets
Governmental Business -Type '
Activities Activities Total
2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003
Revenues:
Program Revenues:
Charges for Services
$ 3,697,062 $
5,320,571
$ 7,884,198 $
7,785,689
$11,581.258 $
13.106,280
operating grants and contributions
576,262
480,037
-
-
576,282
480,037
General revenues:
Properly taxes, levied for general purposes
9,139,422
8,797,888
-
-
9,139,422
8,797,886
Property taxes, levied for debt service
1,922,117
2,070,120
-
1,922.117
2,070,120
Industrial payments
6,898,112
7,276,821
-
-
8,896,112
7,276,821
Franchise taxes
1,718,875
1,682,849
-
-
1,718,875
1,682,849
Sales tax
3,283,459
3,037,574
-
-
3,263.459
3,037,574
unrestricted investment earnings
376,359
542,254
88,602
121,174
464,961
663,428
Miscellaneous
495,102
704,886
914,943
889,298
1,410,045
1,594,184
Gain (loss) on saletretirement of capital assets
(119,204)
(260,545)
(5,784)
-
(124,988)
(260,546)
Total revenues
$ 27.965,568
29,652,453
8,881,957
8,796,161
36,847,523
38.448,614
Expenses:
General Government
10,428.287
8,625,554
-
-
10,428.287
8.625,654
Public Safety
11,648,075
10,771,423
-
-
11.648,075
10,771,423
Public Works
1,267,829
3,638,063
-
1,267,829
3,638,063
Health and Sanitation
1,906,519
1,823,462
-
-
1,908,519
1.823,462
Culture and Recreation
4,106,491
4,048,974
-
-
4,106,491
4,048,974
Interest on Long-term debt
689,644
747,351
-
-
689,644
747,351
Water Services
-
-
6.686,457
6,339.238
6,686,457
6,339,238
Sewer Services
-
1,895,709
1,913,284
1,895,709
1,913,284
Airport
-
-
142,765
149,472
142,765
149,472
Bay Forest Golf Course
-
1,222,819
1,284,729
1,222,819
1,284,729
Sylvan Beach Convention Center
-
-
194.314
212,947
194,314
212,947
Total Expenses
30.046,845
29,654,827
10,142,064
9,899.070
40,188,909
39,554,497
Change In net assets before transfers
(2,081,279)
(2,374)
(1,260,107)
(1.103,609)
(3,341.386)
(1,105,883)
Transfers
884,697
(253,629)
(254,664)
263,629
430,033
-
Change in net assets
(1,398,582)
(256,003)
(1.514,771)
(849.880)
(2,911,353)
(1,105,883)
Netassets- beginning
53,157,984
53,413,987
33,861,874
34,711,754
87,019,858
88,125,741
Netassets- ending
$ 51,761,402 $
53,157,984
$ 32,347,103 $
33,861,874
$ 84,108,505 $
87,019.858
20
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Managements Discussion and Analysis
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S FUNDS
Governmental funds — The focus of the City of La Porte's governmental funds is to provide information on
near -term inflows, outflows, and balances of spendable resources. Such information is useful in assessing
the City's financing requirements. In particular, unreserved fund balance may serve as a useful measure of
a government's net resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year.
' At of the end of the current fiscal year, the City of La Porte's governmental funds reported combined ending
fund balances of $23,143,855. Approximately 67% of this total amount ($15,471,748) constitutes unreserved
fund balance. The remainder of the fund balance is reserved to indicate that it is not available for new
' spending because it has already been committed 1) to pay for encumbrances ($255,876), 2) to provide for
inventories ($69,136), . 3) to pay for debt service ($1,797,213) and 4) to provide for capital projects
construction ($5,549,882).
1 In the general fund, the City budgeted for a decrease in the fund balance of $3,126,590, which was the result
of a shortfall in budgeted revenues and other resources. Due to actual revenues being more than budgeted
and actual expenses being less than budgeted, the actual fund balance decrease for fiscal year 2004 was
$285,895. Debt Service fund balance increased in 2004 by $207,603 and was primarily due to higher than
planned property tax revenue. Capital Improvements fund balance decreased in 2004 by $1,228,062 due to
capital outlay expenditures and transfers to other funds. The 2002 General Obligation Bonds fund balance
decreased in 2004 by $1,452,432 for capital projects expenditures and Other Governmental fund balances
' decreased in 2004 by $444,553.
Proprietary funds — The City's proprietary fund statements provide the same type of information found in
' the government -wide financial statements, but in more detail. Unrestricted net assets of the respective proprietary funds are Utility - - $4,114,918, Airport $367,874,
La Porte Area Water Authority - $193,959, Sylvan Beach Convention Center - $110,116, and Bay Forest Golf
' Course - $(77,499). The change (decrease) in net assets of the proprietary funds in 2004 was as follows:
Utility - $(319,008), Airport - $(114,109), La Porte Area Water Authority - $(98,722), Sylvan Beach
Convention Center- $(19,285), and Bay Forest Golf Course - $(298,756).
' General Fund Budgetary Highlights — The City made revisions to the original appropriations approved by
the City Council. Overall these changes resulted in an increase from the original budget of 0.3% or $73,162.
' The City's budgeted revenue increased .2% as a result of revised revenue projections for interest and
miscellaneous revenue. However, interest earnings were down because of a slow economy and declining
interest rates.
CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEBT ADMINISTRATION
Capital Assets - The City of La Porte's investment in capital assets for its governmental and business -type
activities as of September 30, 200 amounts to $74,899,113 (net of accumulated depreciation). This
investment in capital assets includes land, building, equipment, improvements, infrastructure and
construction in progress.
rMajor capital asset events during the current fiscal year included the following:
e Construction in Progress for improvements to the wastewater treatment plant.
• Infiltration and inflow reduction program for the public works department.
• Approximately $650,000 in fleet replacement.
1 21
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
•
Management's Discussion and Analysis
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Capital Assets at Year-end
Net of Accumulated Depreciation
Land
Buildings
Equipment
Improvements
Infrastructure
Construction in Progress
Total
Governmental
Activities
2004
$ 7,674,926
9,435,606
4,992,023
3,053,101
10, 887,474
Business -type
Activities
2004
$ 2,350,478
499,453
165,631
30,112,057
Total
$ 10,025,404
9,935,059
5,157,654
33,165,158
10,887,474
4,146,625 1,315,218 5,461,843
$ 40,189,755 $ 34,442,837 $ 74,632,592
Additional information of the City of La Porte's capital assets can be found in note 4 on pages 56-58 of this
report.
Debt Administration — At the end of the current fiscal year, the City of La Porte had bonded debt payable of
$21,344,178. Of this amount, $13,230,000 comprises bonded debt backed by the full faith and credit of the
government and $8,114,178 represents bonds secured solely by water and sewer revenues.
General Obligations
Revenue Bonds Payable
Certificate of Obligations
Total
Outstanding Debt at Year End
Bonds Payable
Governmental
Activities
2004
$ 10,830,000
Business -type
Activities
2004
- 8,114,178
2,400,000 -
$ 13,230,000 $ 8,114,178
Totals
$ 10,830,000
8,114,178
2,400,000
$ 21, 344,178
The City of La Porte maintains an "AA" rating from the Standard & Poor's and Fitch and an "Aa" rating from
Moody's for general obligation debt. The revenue bonds have been rated "A" by all three of these rating
agencies.
Additional information on the City of La Porte's long-term debt can be found in note 5 on pages 59-63 of this
report.
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
' Management's Discussion and Analysis
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
ECONOMIC FACTS AND NEXT YEAR'S BUDGETS AND RATES
The unemployment rate for the Houston metropolitan area is currently 6.0 percent, which is a decrease from
a rate of 7.0 percent a year ago. This compares identical to the state's average unemployment rate of 5.5
percent which is comparable to the national average rate of 5.4 percent. The City's budgets for all funds
have benefited from a strong and expanding economy from the past several years, but in this coming fiscal
year, the City's budget has been impacted by the slow down in economic growth. Total assessed property
value for all residential and commercial property in the City of La Porte exceeded $1.8 billion for fiscal year
2004 which is 3.28% higher than last year. The trend for total assessed property values has been steadily
increasing each year with an average annual increase of 11.7% over the past 5 years. Sales tax receipts
' have grown slightly this fiscal year due to an increase in the economy. This revenue source is the most
volatile and subject to decline if an economic slowdown occurs.
J
1.9
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.5
1
ASSESSED PROPERTY VALUATIONS SALES TAX COLLECTIONS
(in billions) (in millions)
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
This financial report is designed to provide our citizens, customers and creditors a general overview of the
City's finances. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional
information should be addressed to the Assistant Director of Finance, 604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte,
Texas, 77571.
1
1 23
• 0
24
7
F,
1
1
1
I
1
BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
25
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Statement of Net Assets
'
September 30, 2004
Primary Govemment
Govemmental
Business -type
'
Activities
Activities
Total
ASSETS
'
Cash and cash equivalents
Investments
$ 19,013,897 $
6,952,943
1,795,120 $
2,436,526
20,809,017
9,389,469
Receivables, net of
allowance for uncollectibles
Accounts receivable
3,333,060
959,226
4,292,286
Taxes receivable
1,327,767
1,327,767
Due from other governments
4,716
-
4,716
Accrued interest receivable
39,402
12,545
51,947
'
Materials and supplies inventories at cost
105,671
4,540
110,211
Restricted Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents restricted
for customer service deposits
437,913
437,913
'
Investments restricted for debt service
565,000
565,000
Other
1,595,841
1,595,841-
Capital assets:
Land
7,681,339
2,739,850
10,421,189
Buildings and improvements
17,844,812
1,052,882
18,897,694
Improvements other than buildings
7,191,272
62,200,573
69,391,845
'
Infrastructure
Machinery and equipment
23,390,331
12,191,599
-
463,060
23,390,331-
12,654,659
Construction in progress
4,834,424
623,632
5,458,056
Accumulated depreciation
(32,005,155)
(32,969,402)
(64,974,557)
'
Total assets
71,906,078
41,917,306
113,823,384
LIABILITIES
Accounts payable
3,589,932
. 396,957
3,986,889.
'
Accrued salaries payable
632,484
142,095
774-1579
Deferred revenue
90,043
42,637'
132,680
Other current liabilities
18,281
18,281
Current portion of bonds payable
1,330,000
985,000
2,315,000
Accrued interest payable
28,760
17,030
45,790
Customer deposits
501,532
501,532
Noncurrent liabilities
Bonds payable, net of current portion
11,900,000
7,129,179
19,029;179
Accrued separation pay
2,573,457
378,289
2,951,746
Total liabilities
20,144,676
9,611, 000
29,755,676
'
NET ASSETS
Invested in capital assets, net of related debt
22,294,484
3,268,462
25,562,946
Restricted for.
Debt service
1,797,213
3,662,800
5,460,013
Capital projects
7,083,521
7,083,521
Other purposes
4,002,670
-
4,002,670
Unrestricted
16,583,514
25,415,841
41,999,355
Total net assets
$ 51,761,402 $
32,306,306 $
84,067,708
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
1
1
27
•
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Statement of Activities
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Program Activities
Governmental activities:
General Government
Public Safety
Public Works
Health & Sanitation
Culture and recreation
Interest on Long Term Debt
Total governmental activities
Business -type activities:
Water Services
Sewer Services
Airport
Golf Course
Sylvan Beach Convention Ctr
Total business -type activities
Total government
Expenses
$ 10,428,287
11,648,075
1,267,829
1,906,519
4,106,491
689,644
30,046,845
6,686,457
1,895,709
142,765
1,222,819
194,314
10,142,064
$ 40,188,909
Program Revenues
Fees, Fines and Operating
Charges for Grants and
Services Contributions
$ 528,296
1,441,662
106,026
463,629
1,157,449
3,697,062
4,155,589
2,493,134
32,728
1,022,103
180,642
7,884,196
$ 11,581,258
$ 238,566
279,596
58,100
576,262
$ 576,262
General revenues:
Taxes:
Property taxes, levied for general purposes
Property taxes, levied for debt service
Industrial payments
Franchise taxes
Public service taxes
Proceeds from sale of bonds
Investment earnings
Gain (loss) on sale/retirement of capital assets
Miscellaneous
Loss on sale of assets
Transfers
Total general revenues and transfers
Change in net assets
Net assets —beginning
Net assets —ending
See accompanying notes to basic financial statements.
28
1
Not(Expenses)Revenues
and Changes in Net Assets
Governmental
Business -type
Activities
Activities Total
$ (9,661,425)
$ _ $ (9,661,425)
'
(9,926,817)
(9,926,817)
(1,161,803)
- (1,161,803)
(1,442,890)
_ (1,442,890)
(2,890,942)
. (2,890,942)
(689,644)
- (689,644)
(25,773,521)
- (25,773,521)
' = (2,530,868) (2,530,868)
597,425 597,425
(110,037) (110,037)
_ (200,716) (200,716)
(13,672) (13,672)
(2,257,868) (2,257,868)
' $ (25,773,521) $ (2,257,868) $ (28,031,389)
9,139,422
-
9,139,422
1,922,117
-
1,922,117
'
6,896,112
6,896,112
1,718,875
-
1,718,875
3,263,459
-
3,263,459
376,359
88,602
464,961
495,102
914,943
1,410,045
'
(119,204)
(5,784)
(124,988)
684,697
(254,664)
430,033
24,376,939
743,097
25,120,036
'
(1,396,582)
(1,514,771)
(2,911,353)
53,157,984
33,861,874
87,019,858
$ 51,761,402
$ 32,347,103
$ 84,108,505
1
1
29
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Balance Sheet
Governmental Funds
September 30, 2004
ASSETS
Cash and cash equivalents
Investments
Receivables, net of allowance for
uncollectibles:
Accounts receivable
Taxes receivable
Due from other governments
Property taxes, delinquent
Grant receivable
Other accounts receivables
Accrued interest receivable
Construction in Progress
Materials and supplies inventories, at cost
Total assets
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable
Accrued salaries payable
Retainage payable
Deferred revenue
Accrued employee separation pay
Total liabilities
Fund balances:
Reserved for:
Inventories
Encumbrances
Municipal Court Building Security
Municipal Court Technology Fee
Park Zone
Debt service
Capital projects
U n reserved/U n designated
Unreserved, reported in nonmajor:
Special revenue funds
Capital projects funds
Total fund balances
Total liabilities and fund balances
General
$ 6,203,691
2,522,822
3,542,132
566,070
14,218
68,055
12,916,988
2,009,532
483,801
2,873,701
100,000
5,467,034
69,136
140,055
79,058
49,902
102,775
7,009,028
7,449,954
$ 12,916,988
See accompanying notes to basic financial statements.
Debt
Service
$ 1,123,082
458,812
132,846
2,603
1,717,343
132,846
132,846
1,584,497
1,584,497
$ 1,717,343
Section 46
Sales Tax
$ 2,348,419
959,400
209,617
5,441
685,800
4,208,677
677,514
677,514
2,845,363
2,845,363
$ 3,522,877
11
I
0i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Other Total
Governmental Governmental
Funds Funds
$ 6,133,489 $ 15,808,681
1,713,869 5,654,903
-
3,542,132
-
698,916
4,716
4,716
130,451
340,068
9,734
31,996
-
685,800
-
68,055
7,992,259
26,835,267
447,589
7,128
168.00
90,043
544,928
3,134,635
490,929
168
3,096,590
100,000
6,822,322
69,136
140,055
79,058
49,902
102,775
1,584,497
- 9,854,391
1,005,159 1,005,159
6,442,172 6,442,172
7,447,331 19,327,145
$ 7,992,259 $ 26,149,467
31
• 0
32
' CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds
Balance Sheet to Statement of Net Assets
September 30, 2004
1
Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net
assets are different because:
Total fund balances - total governmental funds $ 19,327,145
' Capital assets used in governmental activities are not current financial
resources and therefore are not reported in this fund financial
statement, but are reported in the governmental activities of the
' statement of net assets. 36,645,414
Certain other long-term assets are not available to pay current period
expenditures and therefore are not reported in this fund financial
statement, but are reported in the governmental activities of the
statement of net assets. 3,006,547
rInterest
payable on long-term debt does not require current financial
resources. Therefore, interest payable is not recorded as a liability in
'
governmental funds balance sheets. (28,760)
The assets and liabilities of certain internal service funds are not
included in the fund financial statement, but are included in the
governmental activities of the statement of net assets. 8,506,004
Some liabilities, (such as notes payable, capital lease contract
' payable, long-term compensated absences, and bonds payable), are
not due and payable in the current period and are not included in the
fund financial statement, but are included in the governmental activities
' of the statement of net assets:
Bonds Payable (13,230,000)
Compensated Absences Payable (2,464,948)
F�
1
1
Net assets of governmental activities $ 51,761,402
See accompanying notes to basic financial statements.
(0)
33
0 0
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
REVENUES
Property taxes
Franchise taxes
Sales taxes
Industrial payments
Other taxes
Licenses and permits
Fines and forfeits
Charges for services
Intergovernmental
Interest
Miscellaneous
Total revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
General Government
Public Safety
Public Works
Health and Sanitation
Culture and Recreation
Debt service:
Principal retirements
interest and fiscal charges
Capital outlay
Total expenditures
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in
Transfers out
Total other financing sources (uses)
Net change in fund balances
Fund balances —beginning
Fund balances ending
Debt Section 413
General Service Sales Tax
$ 9,101,667 $ 1,952,758 $ -
1,718,875 - -
1,995,654 - 997,827
6,896,112 - -
37,955 - -
320,405 - -
554,559 - -
2,948,580 - -
7,586.00 -
149,347 24,360 34,118
32,605 - -
23,763,345 1,977,118 1,031,945
5,606,562 - -
10,414,544 - -
2,361,192 - -
1,758,964 - -
3,245,144 - -
1,490,000 -
699,834 -
685,800
23,386,406 2,189,834 685,800
376,939 (212,716) 346,145
1,393,757 - -
1,162,766 - -
230,991 - -
607,930 (212,716) 346,145
6,842,024 1,797,213 2,499,218
$ 7,449,954 $ 1,584,497 $ 2,845,363
See accompanying notes to basic financial statements.
34
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Other Total
Governmental Governmental
Funds Funds
$ 15,764
$ 11,070,189
-
1,718,875
-
2,993,481
-
6,896,112
232,023
269,978
-
320,405
-
554,559
(1,240)
2,947,340
568,676
576,262
117,593
325,418
-
32,605
9321816
27,705,224
2,364,722 7,971,284
- 10,414,544
- 2,361,192
- 1,758,964
- 3,245,144
1,490,000
- 699,834
2,573,341 3,259,141
4,938,063 31,200,103
(4,005,247) (3,494,879)
2,075,269 3,469,026
(2,628,091) (1,465,325)
(552,822) (321,831)
(4,558,069) (3,816,710)
12,005,400 23,143,855
$ 7,447,331 $ 19,327,145
35
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and
Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the
Statement of Activities
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are
different because:
Net change in fund balances —total governmental funds: $ (3,729,254)
Governmental funds report outlays for capital assets as expenditures because
such outlays use current financial resources. In contrast, the statement of
activities reports only a portion of the outlay as expense. The outlay is allocated
over the assets' estimated useful lives as depreciation expense for the period.
This is the amount by which capital outlays $3,992,881 exceeded depreciation
$2,346,058 in the current period. 1,646,823
Governmental funds do not present revenues that are not available to pay
current obligations. In contrast, such revenues are reported in the statement
of activities when earned. 328,605
Governmental funds report bond proceeds as current financial resources. In
contrast, the statement of activities treats such issuance of debt as a liability.
Governmental funds report repayment of bond principal as an expenditure. In
contrast, the statement of activities treats such repayments as a reduction in
long-term liabilities. This is the amount by which proceeds exceeded
repayments. 1,490,000
Some expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of
current financial resources and these are not reported as expenditures in
governmental funds:
Accrued interest not reflected in governmental funds
10,190
Additional compensated absences not reflected in governmental funds
(124,125)
Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain
activities, such as fleet maintenance and information technology, to individual
funds. The net revenue (expense) of the internal service funds is reported with
governmental activities.
(1,018,821)
Change in net assets of governmental activities
$ (1,396,582)
See accompanying notes to basic financial statements.
36
r � �
r
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
' General Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
'
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts
Positive
Original
Final
Actual Amounts
(Negative)
REVENUES
Property taxes
$ 8,805,771
$ 8,805,771
$ 9,101,667
$ 295,896
Franchise taxes
1,605,000
1,605,000
1,718,875
113.875
r
Sales taxes
1,859,760
1,859,760
1,995,654
135,894 -
Industrial payments
7,179,487
7,179,487
6,896,112
(283,375)
Other taxes
35,000
35,000
37,955
2,955
Licenses and permits
216,950
569,769
320,405
(249,364)
'
Fines and forfeits
653,950
653,950
554,559
(99,391)
Charges for services
3,322,217
2,969,398
2,948,580
(20,818)
Intergovernmental
350,000
-
7,586
7,586
Interest
226,770
226,770
149,347
(77,423)
r
Miscellaneous
30,000
30,000.=
32,605
2,605
Total revenues
24,284,905
23,934,905
23,763,345
(171,560)
EXPENDITURES
'
General Government:
Administration
2,267,170
2,431,101
2,266,850
69,727
Finance
2,112,889
2,232,525
1,987,528
244,997
Planning & Engineering
1,436,761
1,477,150
1,352,184
124,966
'
Public Safety:
Fire
3,344,305
3,241,561
3,174,851
66,710
Police
7,570,253
7,423,977
7,239,693
184,284
Public Works:
'
Public Works Administration
340,318
340,318
337,312
3,006
Streets
2,156,867
2,156,867
2,023,880
132,987
Health and Sanitation:
Solidwaste
1,772,709
1,772,709
1,758,964
13,7.45
'
Culture and Recreation
3,458,884
3,397,958
3,245,144
152,814
Total expenditures
24,460,156
24,474,166
23,386,406
993,236
Excess (deficiency) of revenues
over expenditures
(175,251)
(539,261)
376,939
821,676
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in
383,243
1,393,757
1,393,757
-
'
Transfers out
Total other financing sources (uses)
(862,766)
(479,523)
(1,162,766)
230,991
(1,162,766)
230,991
Net change in fund balances
(654,774)
(308,270)
607,930
821,676
'
Fund balances -beginning
Fund balances -ending
6,842,024
$ 6,187,250
6,842,024
$ 6,533,754
6,842,024
$ 7,449,954
-
$ 821,676
I
See accompanying notes to basic financial statements
1
1
37
•
7
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Statement of Net Assets
Proprietary Funds
September 30, 2004
Business -type Activities -
Enterprise Funds
La Porte Area
Utility Airport Water Authority
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
Investments
Receivables, net of
allowance for uncollectibles
Accrued interest receivable
Miscellaneous receivables
Material and supplies inventories, at cost
Restricted cash, cash equivalents, and
investments:
Customer service deposits
Current debt service
Total current assets
Noncurrent assets:
Capital assets:
Land
Buildings and improvements
Improvements other than buildings
Vehicles and equipment
Construction in progress
Less accumulated depreciation
Total noncurrent assets
Total assets
LIABILITIES
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable
Accrued salaries payable
Unearned Revenue
Other current liabilities
Accrued interest payable
Payable from restricted assets:
Current portion of revenue bonds
Customer deposits
Total current liabilities
Noncurrent liabilities:
Revenue bonds, net of current portion
Accrued separation pay
Total noncurrent liabilities
Total liabilities
NET ASSETS
Invested in capital assets, net of related debt
Restricted for debt service
Unrestricted (deficit)
Total net assets
11
11
it
$ 1,261,884 $
268,980 $
115,330
2,218,583
109,886
47,663
775,915
7,665
174,841
8,684
623
2,896
4,540
-
-
392,052
565,000
5,226,658
266,009
331,014
40,697,877
327,595
588,727
(24,108,052)
18,303,170
23,529,828
293,301
98,967
2,381
565,000
407,312
1,366,961
629,179
246,271
875,450
2,242,411
387,154
209,290
4,036,174
(2,148,120)
2,097,344
2,484,498
1,711
1,500
3,211
3,211
1,595,841
1,936,571
14,725,570
(4,537,108)
10,188,462
12,125,033
83,005
14,649
420,000
517,654
6,500,000
6,500,000
7,017,654
- - 3,268,462
2,066,959 - 1,595,841
19,220,458 2,481,287 243,076
$ 21,287,417 $ 2,481,287 $ 5,107,379
See accompanying notes to basic financial statements.
1
I
'
Business -type Activities
-
Governmental
Enterprise Funds
Activities -
'
Sylvan Beach
Convention Center
Bay Forest
Golf Course
Totals
Internal
Service Funds
'
$ 143,030
$ 5,896
$ 1,795,120
$ 3,205,216
58,432
1,962
2,436,526
1,298,040
805
-
959,226
-
'
331
11
12,545
7,406
-
-
-
79,711
'
-
-
4,540
37,616
45,861
-
437,913
-
'
-
-
2,160,841
-
248,459
7,869
7,806,711
.4,627,989
'
-
1,880,965
2,356,264
-
383,586
721,868
1,436,468
-
-
2,540,952
62,200,573
-
'
135,465
463,060
10,800,404
34,905
-
623,632
-
'
(277,564)
140,927
(1,898,558)
3,380,692
(32,969,402) (6,317,196)
34,110,595 4,483,208
389,386
3,388,561
41,917,306
9,111,197
2,973
15,967
396,957
455,129
6,628
36,500
142,095
41,555
42,637
-
42,637
-
'
16,781
18,281
-
-
17,030
-
'
-
-
985,000
-
94,220
-
501,532
-
'
146,458
69,248
2,103,532
496,684
-
-
7,129,179
-
4,438
127,580
378,289
108,419
'
4,438
127,580
7,507,468
108,419
150,896
196,828
9,611,000
605,103
-
-
3,268,462
4,483,208
'
3,662,800
238,490
3,191,733
25,375,044
4,022,885
$ 238,490
$ 3,191,733
$ 32,306,306
$ 8,506,093
'
39
•
Ei
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Assets
Proprietary Funds
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Operating revenues:
Userfees
Operating expenses:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Depreciation
Total operating expenses
Operating income (loss)
Business -type Activities -
EnterDrise Funds
La Porte Area
Utility Airport Water Authority
$ 5,775,929 $ 32,728 $ 878,880
2,255,709
-
-
186,266
-
109
2,683,660
14,222
892,297
1,231,926
128,543
441,913
6,357,561
142,765
1,334,319
(581,632)
(110,037)
(455,439)
Nonoperating revenues (expenses):
Interest income
60,292
4,422
21,014
Interest expense and fiscal charges
(85,935)
-
(374,318)
Gain (loss) on sale of equipment
(2,465)
-
-
Total nonoperating revenue (expenses)
(28,108)
4,422
(353,304)
Income (loss) before contributions
and transfers
(609,740)
(105,615)
(808,743)
Capital contributions
-
-
866,879
Transfers in
1,250,000
-
-
Transfers out
(1,892,725)
(1,073)
(54,650)
Change in net assets
(1,252,465)
(106,688)
3,486
Total net assets —beginning
22,539,882
2,587,975
5,103,893
Total net assets —ending
$ 21,287,417
$ 2,481.287
$ 5,107,379
40
1
r-
U
Business -type Activities —
Governmental
Enterprise Funds
Activities —
Sylvan Beach
Bay Forest
Internal
Convention Center
Golf Course
Totals
Service Funds
$ 182,694
$ 1,022,232
$ 7,892,463
$ 5,526,713
132,297
769,776
3,157,782
1,467,194
4,900
123,008
314,283
355,502
40,891
183,421
3,814,491
4,596,671
16,226
146,614
1,965,222
1,064,432
194,314
1,222,819
9,251,778
7,483,799
(11,620)
(200,587)
(1,359,315)
(1,957,086)
2,351 523
(4,319)
2,351 (3,796)
(9,269) (204,383)
20,000
35,000
(4,605)
(36,644)
6,126
(206,027)
232,364
3,397,760
$ 238,490
$ 3,191,733
88,602 50,941
(460,253)- -
(6,784) (119,204)
(378,435) (68,263)
(1,737,750) (2,025,349)
866,879 -
1,305,000 1,034,797
(1,989,697) (28,269)
(1,555,568) (1,018,821)
33,861,874 9,524,911
$ 32,306,306 $ 8,506,090
1
41
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Statement of Cash Flows
Proprietary Funds
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Cash received from user fees
Cash payments to suppliers
Cash payments for personal services
Net cash provided by operating activities
CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Business -type Activities -
Enterprise Funds
La Porte Area
Utility Airport Water Authority
$ 5,682,988 $ 25,181 $ 986,748
(2,831,342) (21,386) (883,676)
(2,260,403) -
591,243 3,795 103,072
Advance to primary government
-
-
(902)
Operating transfers in from other funds
1,250,000
-
-
Operating transfers out to other funds
(1,892,725)
-
(54,650)
Net cash from noncapital financing activies
(642,725)
(1,073)
(55,552)
CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND
RELATED FINANCIANG ACTIVITIES
Payments received from participants for debt service
-
-
789,024
Payments received from participants for capital recovery
-
-
86,574
Payments for capital acquisitions
(792,520)
-
-
Proceeds from sale of assets
-
-
-
Principal payments on revenue bonds
(580,000)
-
(405,000)
Interest paid on debt
(71,182)
-
(375,307)
Net cash (used) by capital and related financing activies
(1,443,702)
-
95,291
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Interest on investments
59,030
4,277
21,014
Net Investments (purchased) sold
10,580
(43,420)
(831)
Net cash provided by investing activities
69,610
(39,143)
20,183
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
(1,425,574)
(36,421)
162,994
Balances -beginning of the year
3,745,554
303,852
-
Balances -end of the year
$
2,319,980
$
267,431
$
162,994
Reconciliation of operating Income (loss) to net cash
provided (used) by operating activities:
Operating income (loss)
$
(581,632)
$
(110,037)
$
(13,526)
Adjustments to reconcile operating income to net cash
provided (used) by operating activities:
Depreciation expense
1,231,926
128,543
-
(Increase) decrease in accounts receivable
(92,941)
(7,547)
107,868
(Increase) decrease in inventories
-
-
-
Increase (decrease) in accrued salaries payable
19,229
-
-
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable
23,324
(1,378)
8,730
Increase (decrease) in other current liabilities
-
-
-
Increase (decrease) in customer utility deposits
15,260
-
-
Increase (decrease) in accrued employee separation
(23,923)
-
-
Total adjustments
1,172,875
119,618
116,598
Net cash provided by operating activities
$
591,243
$
9,581
$
103,072
Reconciliation of total cash and cash Investments:
Current Assets - cash and cash equivalents
$
1,261,884
$
268,980
$
115,330
Restricted Assets - cash and cash equivalents
392,052
-
-
Total cash and cash equivalents
$
1,653,936
$
268,980
$
115,330
See accompanying notes to basic financial statements.
42
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Business -type Activities -
Governmental
Enterprise Funds
Activities -
Sylvan Beach
Bay Forest
Internal
Convention Center
Golf Course
Totals
Service Funds
$
183,794
$ 1,022,232
$ 7,900,943
$ 5,447,002
(42,789)
(316,756)
(4,095,949)
(4,657,291)
(130,058)
(761,602)
(3,152,063)
(608,373)
10,947
(56,126)
652,931
(654,042)
-
-
(902)
-
15,395
-
1,265,395
-
-
-
(1,947,375)
(877)
15,395
(1,644)
(685,599)
1,033,920
-
-
789,024
-
-
-
86,574
-
-
(56,367)
(848,887)
(964,281)
-
-
81,131
-
-
(985,000)
-
-
-
(446,489)
-
-
(56,367)
(1,404,778)
(871,915)
2,296
660
87,277
49,922
(19,257)
20,170
(32,758)
(409,070)
(16,961)
20,830
54,519
(359,148)
9,381
(93,307)
(1,382,927)
(878,577)
178,687
99,176
4,327,269
4,065,502
$
188,068
$ 5,869
$ 2,944,342
$ 3,186,925
$
(11,620)
$ (200.587)
$ (917,402)
$ (1,957,086)
16,226
146,614
1,523,309
1,064,432
1,100
-
8,480
-
-
-
-
64,569
1,773
8,566
29,568
7,999
(9,020)
(11,656)
10,000
230,313
(1,434)
1,329
(105)
-
48,359
-
63,619
-
466
(392)
(23,849)
3,524
57,470
144,461
1,611,022
1,370,837
$
45,850
$ (56,126)
$ 693,620
$ (654,041)
$
143,030
$ 5,896
$ 1,795,120
$ 3,205,216
-
-
392,052
-
$
143,030
$ 5,896
$ 2,187,172
$ 3,205,216
43
44
r • •
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
r Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
1. Summary of significant accounting policies
' A. General Statement
The City of La Porte, Texas (the City), was incorporated on August 10, 1892, and operates under a "Council
r — Manager" form of government and provides the following services as authorized by its charter: public
safety, development services, public health and welfare, culture and recreation, and waterworks.
r The accounting and reporting policies of the City relating to the funds included in the accompanying basic
financial statements conform to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) applicable to state
and local governments which include those principles prescribed by the Governmental Accounting
Standards Board (GASB), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the Financial
rAccounting Standards Board. The more significant accounting policies of the City are described below.
B. Financial Reoortina Entity
r The City's basic financial statements include the accounts of all City operations. The City, with its elected
governing body of mayor and eight council members, is considered a primary government. As required by
generally accepted accounting principles, the basic financial statements include the City and its component
units, entities for which the government is considered to be financially accountable. Blended component
units, although legally separate entities, are, in substance, part of the government's operations. All
component units have been included as blended component units because of the significance of their
roperational and financial relationships with the City. The La Porte Area Water Authority (the Authority) is governed by a five- member board appointed by the City
Council. Although it is a legally separate entity, the Authority provides services almost exclusively for the
r City's water operations, and is in substance a part of the City's primary operations. The Authority was
created by the City to finance the operations involved in obtaining surface water supplies and converting
these supplies to potable water. This water is sold primarily to the City of La Porte (86%) with the remainder
being sold to other neighboring political subdivisions. The operations of the Authority are reported as a
rproprietary fund type.
The Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone One (the Zone) is governed by a nine -member board appointed by
r the City Council. The Zone provides benefits exclusively for the City through reinvestment financing of ad
valorem taxes, which are utilized for capital improvements for the City of La Porte. The Zone is presented
as a governmental fund type.
r The Section 4B Sales Tax corporation is governed by a seven -member board appointed by City Council and
was organized to undertake projects that the board determines to promote new or expanded business
enterprises and various projects as described in Section 4B of Article 5190.6. The Section 4B Sales Tax
rCorporation is presented as a governmental fund type.
Complete financial statements for each of the individual component units may be obtained through the City
r of La Porte.
C. Basis of Presentation
rGovernment Wide Statements:
The government -wide financial statements (i.e. the statement of net assets and the statement of changes in
net assets) report information on all of the nonfiduciary activities of the City, including the component units.
' The effect of interfund activity has been removed from these statements. Governmental activities, which are
normally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues, are reported separately from business -type
activities, which rely significantly on fees and charges for support. Likewise, the primary government is
' reported separately from certain legally separate component units for which the primary government is
financially accountable.
1 45
7
CITY OF IA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
1. Summary of significant accounting policies - Continued
The statement of activities demonstrates the degree to which the direct expenses of a given program or
function is offset by program revenues. Direct expenses are those that are clearly identifiable with a specific
program or function. Program revenues include 1) charges to customers or applicants who purchase, use,
or directly benefit from goods, services, or privileges provided by a given program or function and 2)
operating or capital grants and contributions -that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital
requirements of a particular program or function. Taxes and other items not properly included among
program revenues are reported instead as general revenues.
The accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds and account groups, each of which is
considered a separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for with a separate set
of self -balancing accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues and expenditures or
expenses, as appropriate. Government resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds
based on the purposes for which they are to be spent and the means by which spending activities are
controlled. Individual funds and account groups summarized in the accompanying financial statements are
classified below.
Fund Financial Statements:
The City segregates transactions related to certain functions or activities in separate funds in order to aid
financial management and to demonstrate legal compliance. Separate statements are presented for
governmental and proprietary activities. These statements present each major fund as a separate column
on the fund financial statements; all non -major funds are aggregated and presented in a single column with
the exception of the non -major proprietary funds which are presented separately even thought they do not
meet the criteria of a major fund established in Government Accounting Standard Board Statement No. 34.
Governmental funds are those through which most governmental functions typically are financed. The
measurement focus of governmental funds is on the sources, uses and balance of current financial
resources.
The City has presented the following major governmental funds:
(a) General Fund - is the main operating fund of the City. This fund is used to account for all financial
resources not accounted for in other funds. All general tax revenues and other receipts that are not
restricted by law or contractual agreement to some other fund are accounted for in this fund.
General operating expenditures, fixed charges and capital improvement costs that are not paid
through other funds are paid from the General Fund.
(b) Debt Service Fund - is used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of,
principal, interest and related costs on general long-term debt paid primarily from taxes levied by the
City. The fund balance of the Debt Service Fund is reserved to signify the amounts that are
restricted exclusively for debt service expenditures.
(c) Section 48 Sales Tax Fund - is used to account for funds received from the % cent sales tax 1
dedicated to certain economic and infrastructure projects.
1
1
1
46 1
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
' September 30, 2004
1. Summary of significant accounting policies - Continued
Proprietary Funds are accounted for using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual
basis of accounting. The accounting objectives are determinations of net income, financial position and
cash flow. All assets and liabilities are included on the Statement of Net Assets. Proprietary funds
distinguish operating revenues and expenses from non -operating items. Operating revenues and expenses
generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with a proprietary
fund's principal ongoing operations. Operating expenses for the proprietary funds include the cost of
personal and contractual services, supplies and depreciation on capital assets. All revenues and expenses
not meeting this definition are reported as non -operating revenues and expenses.
The City reports the following major proprietary funds:
(a) Utility Fund - is used to account for the provision of water and sewer services to the residents of the
City. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including, but
' not limited to administration, operations and maintenance of the water and sewer system and billing
and collection activities. The fund also accounts for the accumulation of resources for, and the
payment of, long-term debt principal and interest for water and sewer debt. All costs are financed
through charges to utility customers with rates reviewed regularly and adjusted if necessary to
' ensure integrity of the fund.
(b) La Porte Area Water Authority Fund - is used to account for revenues and expenses related to
' obtaining raw surface water and converting it to potable water to be sold to La Porte and
neighboring cities.
(c) Bay Forest Golf Course - is used to account for the revenues and expenses relative to the
administration, operation and maintenance of the public golf course. All costs are financed through
fees charged to patrons.
' (d) Airport - is used to account for the operation of the City's airport.
(e) Sylvan Beach - is used to account for activity surrounding the City's operation of the Sylvan Beach
Pavilion and Convention Center
' The Bay Forest Golf Course, Airport and Sylvan Beach Convention Center are the three non -major
proprietary funds that are reported as major funds.
' Additionally, the City reports the Internal Service Funds which are used to account for the Motor Pool,
Technology and Insurance services provided to departments of the City.
' D. Measurement Focus and Basis of Accounting
Measurement focus refers to what is being measured; basis of accounting refers to when revenues and
expenditures are recognized in the accounts and reported in the financial statements. Basis of accounting
relates to the timing of the measurement made, regardless of the measurement focus applied.
The government -wide financial statements and fund financial statements for proprietary funds are reported
using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. The economic
resources measurement focus means all assets and liabilities (whether current or non -current) are included
on the statement of net assets. The operating statements present increases (revenues) and decreases
(expenses) in net total assets. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized when they
' are earned. Expenses are recognized at the time the liability is incurred. Unbilled water and wastewater
utility service receivables are accrued as revenues and reflected in the financial statements.
r]
1 47
•
CJ
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
1. Summary of significant accounting policies - Continued
Governmental fund financial statements are reported using the current financial resources measurement
focus and are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Under the modified accrual
basis of accounting, revenues are recognized when susceptible to accrual; i.e., when they become both
measurable and available. "Measurable" means the amount of the transaction can be determined and
"available" means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities
of the current period. For this purpose, the government considers revenues to be available if they are
collected within 60 days of the current fiscal period.
Most revenue sources are recorded as revenues when received in cash because they are generally not
measurable until actually received. The revenues susceptible to accrual are property and sales taxes,
franchise fees, interest income and intergovernmental revenues. A one-year availability period is used for
recognition of all other Governmental Fund revenues. Expenditures are recorded when the related fund
liability is incurred. However, debt service expenditures, as well as expenditures related to compensated
absences are recorded only when payment is due.
E. Budgetary Information
Annual budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Annual
appropriated budgets are adopted for the general, special revenue funds and debt service funds. All annual
appropriations lapse at fiscal year-end. Project length financial plans are adopted for all capital projects
funds.
The City uses the following procedures in establishing the budgets reflected in the financial statements:
1. Prior to August 15, the City Manager submits to the City Council a proposed operating budget for the
fiscal year commencing on the following October 1. The operating budget includes proposed
expenditures and the means of financing them.
2. A public hearing is conducted to obtain taxpayer comments.
3. Prior to September 30, the budget is legally enacted through passage of an ordinance.
4. The City Manager must approve changes within a department, which is the legal level of control. City
Council approves changes between departments as well as amendments to the budget during the year
as may be required.
5. Formal budgetary integration is employed as a management control device during the year for the
General Fund and Proprietary Funds. Formal budgetary integration is not employed for the Debt
Service Fund and Capital Projects Funds because. effective budgetary control is alternatively achieved
through bond indenture provisions and legally binding construction contracts, respectively.
6. The budget for the General Fund and Special Revenue Funds are adopted on a basis consistent with
GAAP. Budgets for the Proprietary Funds are utilized for planning, control and evaluation purposes.
They are adopted on a basis consistent with GAAP except that bond principal payments and fixed asset
acquisitions are treated as expenditures.
7. Budgeted amounts are amended by the City Council during the year. Individual amendments were not
material in relation to the original appropriations, which were amended.
Encumbrances represent commitments related to unperformed contracts for goods or services.
Encumbrance accounting - under which purchase orders, contracts and other commitments for the
expenditure of resources are recorded to reserve that portion of the applicable appropriation - is utilized in
the governmental funds throughout. the. year.. Encumbered amounts lapse at year-end. However,
encumbrances generally are reappropriated as part of the following year's budget.
48
• 0
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
1. Summary of significant accounting policies - Continued
' F. Cash and Investments
Cash includes amounts in demand deposits, short-term investments, which mature within ninety days of the
fiscal year end, and various petty cash funds. The short-term investments are stated at cost or amortized
cost, which approximate fair value. The short-term investments consist of U.S. Treasury Bills, and deposits
in the Texas Local Government Investment Pool (TexPool) and the Local Government Investment
' Cooperative (LOGIC), both of which have the general characteristics of a demand deposit account. For
purpose of the statement of cash flows, Proprietary Fund types consider temporary investments with a
maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents.
' In accordance with Statement No. 31, the City reports all investments at fair value, except for "money
market investments" and "20-like pools". Money market investments, which are short-term highly liquid
' debt instruments that may include U.S. Treasury and agency obligations, are reported at amortized costs.
Investment positions in external investment pools that are operated in a manner consistent with the SEC's
Rule 2a7 of the Investment Company Act of 1940, such as TexPool and LOGIC, are reported using the
pools' share price.
G. Prepaid Items
Prepaid balances are for payments made by the City in the current year to provide services occurring in the
'
subsequent fiscal year, and the reserve for prepaid items has been recognized to signify that a portion of
fund balance is not available for other subsequent expenditures.
'
H. Receivables
Receivables as of year-end of the government's individual major and non -major funds, and internal service
funds, including the applicable allowances for uncollectible accounts, are as follows:
Fund Taxes Interest Other Accounts
General $1,240,011 $13,135 $ 3,591,930
Total
$ 4,845,076
_
Debt Service 326,837 2,309
329,146
Capital Improvements - 4,842 4,716 -
9,558
'
2002 G.O. Bonds - 26 - -
26
Utility 7,422 717,606
725,028
Water Authority - 2,065 - 282,709
284,774
Golf Course 148 - -
148
-
Non -major and Other 16,198 154,972 2,023
173,193
Gross Receivables 1,566,848 46,145 159,688 4,594,268
6,366,949
Less: allowance for
- (787,553)
uncollectibles (859,282) -
(1,646,835)
Net total receivables $ 707,566 $ 46,145_ $ 159,688 $ 3,806,715
$ 4,720,114
J
1
1 49
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
1. Summary of significant accounting policies - Continued
Governmental funds reported deferred revenue in connection with receivables for revenues that are not
considered to be available to liquidate liabilities of the current period. Revenue recognition is also deferred
in connection with resources that have been received, but not yet earned in the proprietary funds. At the
end of the current fiscal year, the various components of deferred revenue and unearned revenue reported
in the governmental and proprietary funds were as follows:
Unavailable Unearned
General Debt Service Proprietary Total
Delinquent property taxes receivable 566,070 132,846 $ - $ 698,916
Charges for services and customer deposits 2,307,631 - 42,637 2,350,268
Total deferred / unearned revenue $ 2,873,701 $ 132,846 $ 42,637 $ 3,049,184
I. Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities
and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported
amounts of revenues, expenditures, and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results may differ
from those estimates.
J. Indirect Expense Allocations
It is the policy of the City not to allocate indirect expenses to various functions in the Government -wide
Statement of Activities.
K. Restricted Assets
The City applies restricted resources when an expense is incurred for purposes for which both restricted
and unrestricted net assets are available.
L. Inventories
Inventories consist of material and supplies and are valued at cost (first -in, first -out). Inventories for all
funds consist of expendable supplies held for consumption and the cost thereof is recorded as an
expenditure at the time individual inventory items are issued. Reported inventories in the Governmental
Funds are offset by a fund balance reserve, which indicates they are unavailable for appropriation even
though they are a component of net current assets.
M. Interfund Transactions
Transactions Between Funds
Transactions between funds that would be treated as revenues, expenditures or expenses if they involved
organizations external to the governmental unit are accounted for as revenues, expenditures or expenses in
the funds involved. Transactions, which constitute reimbursement to a fund for expenditures or expenses
initially made from that fund,.which are properly attributable to another fund, are recorded as expenditures
or expenses in the reimbursing fund and as reductions of the expenditure or expense in the fund that is
reimbursed.
Nonrecurring or nonroutine transfers of equity between funds are reported as additions to, or reductions of,
the fund balance of Governmental Funds. Transfers of equity to Proprietary Funds are treated as
contributed capital and such transfers from Proprietary Funds are reported as reductions of retained
earnings or contributed capital, as is appropriate in the circumstances. All other legally authorized transfers
are treated as operating transfers and are included in the results of operations of both Governmental and
Proprietary Funds.
50
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
' Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
7. Summary of significant accounting policies - Continued
' N. Capital Assets
Capital assets, which include property, plant, equipment, and infrastructure assets, are reported in the
applicable governmental or business -type activities columns in the government -wide financial statements
and in the fund financial statements for proprietary funds. Capital assets are defined by the government as
assets with an initial unit cost of $5,000 or more and an estimated useful life exceeding two years. Such
' assets are recorded at historical cost or estimated historical cost if actual historical cost is not available.
Donated capital assets are recorded at their fair market value on the date donated. Repairs and
maintenance that do not add to the value of the asset or extend assets lives are recorded as expenses.
Interest cost during construction is capitalized when the effect of capitalization materially impact the financial
statements. During the year ended September 30, 2004, no interest costs were capitalized.
Property, plant, and equipment of the primary government, as well as the component units, are depreciated
' using the straight line method over the following estimated useful lives:
Buildings 20 years
Water and Sewer System 20 - 40 years
Infrastructure 20 - 30 years
Machinery and Equipment 4 -10 years
Improvements 20 years
1 O. Comg_ensated Absences
The City's employees earn vacation and sick leave, which may either be taken or accumulated, up to certain
amounts, until paid upon termination or retirement. For all funds, this liability reflects amounts attributable to
cumulative employee services already rendered, where the payment is probable and can be reasonably
estimated. The current and long-term portions of the governmental fund type liabilities are recorded in the
Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets. The proprietary fund type liability is recorded as a liability in the
individual proprietary funds since payment of this liability will be made from resources of these funds.
Policies relating to the accrual and payment of these benefits are as follows:
M■ Vacation - Employees earn from 10 to 25 days of vacation per year. Upon separation, employees
are paid for all accumulated vacation leave (up to one and one half times their annual accrual rate).
' ■ Sick Leave - Employees earn an average of 10 sick hours per month of service. Non -civil service
employees hired after November 19, 1991, and who have completed 10 consecutive years of
service with the City, are paid for accumulated sick leave, subject to a limit of 480 hours. Civil
' service employees are subject to a limit of 720 hours.
The liability for compensated absences at September 30, 2004 is comprised of the following:
Governmental Business Type Total
Vacation $ 636,859 $ 137,153 $ 774,011
Sick Leave 1,505,239 269,318 1,774,558
' Total All Funds $ 2,142,098 $ 406,471 $ 2,548,569
51
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
1. Summary of significant accounting policies - Continued
P. Long-term Obligations
In the government -wide financial statements, and proprietary fund types in the fund financial statements,
long-term debt and other long-term obligations are reported as liabilities in the applicable governmental
activities, business -type activities, or proprietary fund type. statement of net assets. Bond premiums and
discounts, as well as issuance costs, are deferred and amortized over the life of the bonds using the
straight-line method. Bonds payable are reported net of the applicable bond premium or discount.
In the fund financial statements, governmental fund types recognize bond premiums and discounts, as well
as bond issuance costs, during the current period. The face amount of debt issued is reported as other
financing sources. Premiums received on debt issuances are reported as other financing sources while
discounts on debt issuances are reported as other financing uses. Issuance costs, whether or not withheld
from the actual debt proceeds received, are reported as debt service expenditures.
Q. Reservations of Fund Balances
The fund balance reserves for revenue bond retirement and construction, prepaid items, inventory, and debt
service are discussed in notes 5, 1(G), 1(L), and 1(C) respectively.
R. Net Assets
Net assets represent the difference between assets and liabilities. Net assets invested in capital assets, net
of related debt consists of capital assets, net of accumulated depreciations, reduced by the outstanding
balances of any borrowing used for the acquisition, construction or improvements of those assets, and
adding back unspent proceeds. Net assets are reported as restricted when there are limitations imposed on
their use either through the enabling legislations adopted by the city or through external restrictions imposed
by creditors, grantors or laws or regulations of other governments.
2. Cash, Cash Equivalents and Investments
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The carrying amount of the City's deposits with financial institutions as of September 30, 2004, was
$1,261,934 and the bank balance was $1,522,503. All of the bank balance was fully covered by federal
depository insurance or collateral held by the City's agent -held in -the City's name.
Short term deposits in the Texas Local Government Investment Pool (TexPool), the Local Government
Investment Cooperative (LOGIC), and Tex Star were $18,456,886 at September 30, 2004.
Credit Risk
Collateral is required for all bank deposits at 100% of deposits not covered by federal depository insurance.
Obligations that may be pledged as such collateral are obligations of the United States and its agencies and
obligations of the State and its municipalities and school districts. Collateral pledged to cover the City's
deposits is required to be held in the City's name by the trust department of a bank other than the pledging
bank (the City's agent). Collateral securities must bear a Baa-1 or better rating to qualify for use in securing
uninsured depository balances. Deposits at year-end are -representative of the types of deposits maintained
by the City during the year.
52
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
2. Cash, Cash Equivalents and Investments - Continued
' Investments
Under provisions of state and local statutes, the City's investment policies, and provisions of the City's
depository contracts with the area financial institutions, the City is authorized to place available deposits and
investments in the following:
❖ Obligations of the U.S., its agencies, and instrumentalities.
' ❖ Direct obligations of the State of Texas or its agencies.
❖ Collateralized mortgage obligations directly issued by a federal agency or instrumentality of the
United States, the underlying security for which is guaranteed by an agency or instrumentality of the
' United States.
❖ Other obligations, the principal and interest on which are unconditionally guaranteed or insured by,
or backed by full faith and credit of the State of Texas or the United States or their agencies and
' instrumentalities.
❖ Obligations of states, agencies, counties, cities and other political subdivisions of any state having
been rated as to the investment quality by a nationally recognized investment firm and having
received a rating of not less than A or its equivalent.
66 Certificates of Deposit issued by state and national banks or savings and on associations domiciled
in this state that are:
- guaranteed or insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; or
1 - secured by obligations that are described in 1-5 above, which are intended to include all
direct federal agency or instrumentality issued mortgage backed securities that have a
market value of not less than the principal amount of the certificates or in any other manner
and amount provided by law for deposit of the investing entities.
' ❖ Certificates of Deposit and share certificates issued by a state or federal credit union domiciled in
the State of Texas that are guaranteed or insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or
the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund, or are secured as to principal by obligations
' described in 1 through 5 above in any other manner and amount provided by law for the City
deposits.
Fully collateralized repurchase agreements having a defined termination date, secured by
obligations of the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, pledged with a third party selected
' or approved by the political entity, and placed through a primary government securities dealer, as by
the Federal Reserve, or through a financial institution domiciled in the State of Texas.
•, Prime domestic banker's acceptances, defined as a banker's acceptance with a remaining term of
270 days or less, if the short-term obligations of the accepting bank or its parent are rated at least
A-1 or P-1 or equivalent by at least one nationally recognized credit rating agency.
❖ Commercial paper that is rated at least A-1 or P 1 or the equivalent by either (a) two nationally
recognized credit agencies or (b) one nationally recognized credit rating agency if the paper is fully
' secured by an irrevocable letter of credit issued by a U.S. or State bank.
❖ SEC -registered no-load money market mutual fund (MMMF), with a dollar weighted average
portfolio maturity of 90 days or less, includes in their investment objectives the maintenance of a
stable net asset value of $1 for each share.
❖ SEC -registered, no-load money market mutual funds (MMMF) that have an average weighted
maturity of less than two years, invests exclusively in obligations described above and are
continuously rated as to investment quality by at least one nationally recognized investment rating
' firm of no less than AAA or its equivalent.
❖ Authorized government investment pools that invest solely in obligations of any of the above
investments provided that the pools are rated no lower than Aaa or AAA or an equivalent by at least
one nationally recognized rating service.
All significant legal and contractual provisions for investments were complied with during the fiscal year.
Investments at year-end are representative of the types of investments maintained by the City during the
' year.
1 53
11)
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
2. Cash, Cash Equivalents and Investments - Continued
The City's investments at year-end are summarized below and have been classified in credit risk categories.
Credit risk categories are as follows:
(1) Insured or registered, or securities are held by the City or its agent in the City's name,
(2) Uninsured and unregistered, with securities held by the counter-party's trust department or agent in
the City's name or
(3) Uninsured and unregistered, with securities held by counter -party, or by its trust department or
agent but not in the City's name.
U.S. Government Agency Notes
Investments not Subject to Categorization:
TEXPOOL
LOGIC
TexStar
Total Investments
Investments Classified as Cash Equivalents
Total Investments per Balance Sheet
Credit Risk
Carrying
Fair
Category
Amount
Value
1
$ 10,985,310
$ 10,985,310
N/A
11,582,913
11,582,913
N/A
3,848,296
3,848,296
3,025,677
3,025,677
29,442,196
$ 29,442,196
18,456,866
$ 10,285,310
The U.S. government securities were purchased through a broker/dealer and are held for safekeeping by
the City's depository bank (independent agent), registered for the account of City of La Porte. The City
generally holds all investments to maturity date. The City had no derivative investment products during the
current year. The City did not have any reverse repurchase or repurchase agreement transactions. Fair
values of investments are based on quoted market prices. The investments are reported by the City at fair
values determined by quoted market prices. All realized gains/losses are reported in the financial
statements. These calculations are independent of calculations of the net change in fair value of
investments. The City has unrealized gains of $138 reported in the financial statements as of September
30, 2004.
Investment balances in public investment pools are not evidenced by underlying securities that exist in
physical or book entry form and, therefore, are not subject to credit risk categorization.
The City utilizes the pooled investment concept to maximize interest earnings. Interest earned on
investments is distributed to each participating fund based on each individual fund's proportionate share of
the pool and is done on a monthly basis. In accordance with GASB Statement No. 31, the City reports all
investments at fair value, except for "money market investments" and "20-like pools". Pursuant to
investment agreements approved by each participant with each pool, the business and affairs of the pools
are required to be managed by each pool's Board of Trustees (the Board). The Board consists of members
representing entities that have adopted the investment agreements. The duties of the boards include, but
are not limited to, adopting investment policies, appointing investment officers, overseeing the selection of
investment managers, custodian banks, investments consultants, and other service providers, monitoring
compliance with the pools' investment policy, monitoring performance, and revising the investment policies
to reflect changing conditions affecting the pools or the needs of the participants. Money - market
investments, which are short-term highly liquid debt instruments that may include U.S. Treasury and agency
obligations, are reported at amortized costs. Investment positions in external investment pools that are
operated in a manner consistent with SEC's Rule 2a7 of the Investment Company Act of 1940, such as
TexPool and LOGIC are reported using pool's share price.
54
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
3. Property tax
' The appraisal of property within the City is the responsibility of the Harris County Appraisal District (the
Appraisal District). The Appraisal District is required under the Property Tax Code to appraise all property
within the county on the basis of 100% of its market value. The value of real property within the Appraisal
I District must be reviewed every five years; however, the City may, at its own expense, require annual
reviews of appraised values. The City may challenge appraised values established by the Appraisal District
through various appeals and, if necessary, take legal action. Under this legislation, the City continues to set
' tax rates on City property. However, if the effective tax rate, excluding tax rates for repayment of general
obligation bonds and other contractual obligations, adjusted for new improvements, exceeds the rate for the
previous year by more than 8%, qualified voters of the City may petition for an election to determine whether
to limit the tax rate to no more than 8% above the effective tax rate.
The City's property taxes are levied annually in October on the basis of the Appraisal District's assessed
values as of January 1 of that calendar year. Appraised values are established by the Appraisal District at
' market value, assessed at 100% of appraised value and certified by the Harris County Appraisal District
Board of Review. The City's property taxes are billed and collected by the City's Tax Assessor/Collector.
Such taxes are applicable to the fiscal year in which they are levied and become delinquent with an
enforceable lien on property on January 1 of the current calendar year.
The City is permitted, by Article XI, Section 5, of the State of Texas Constitution and the City Charter, to levy
property taxes up to $2.50 per $100 of assessed valuation for general governmental services. Within the
$2.50 maximum levy, there is no legal limit upon the amount of property taxes, which can be levied for debt
service. The property tax rates to finance general governmental services and debt service for the 2003-04
tax year were $0.575 and $0.135 respectively, per $100 of assessed valuation. The 2005 assessed value
and total tax levy as adjusted through September 30, 2004 were $1,560,406,910 and $11,078,891
respectively.
The City has enacted an ordinance providing for the exemption of twenty percent (20%) of the assessed
value of residential homesteads plus and additional $60,000 for persons 65 years of age or older for
' property taxes. An exemption of $60,000 is allowed for disabled persons on homesteads and up to $12,000
is allowed for disabled veterans on any one piece of property. Additionally, the market value of agricultural
land is reduced to agricultural value for purposes of the City's tax levy calculation.
1
1 55
CITY OF
LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
4. Capital Assets
Capital asset activity for the year ended September 30, 2004 was as follows:
Beginning
Ending
Balance
Retirements &
Balance
10/01/03
Additions
Adjustments
09/30/04
Governmental activities:
Capital assets, not being depreciated:
Land
$ 7,128,945
$ 552,394
$ -
$ 7,681,339
Construction in progress
1,900,979
2,955,199
(21,754)
4,834,424
Total capital assets, not being depreciated
9,029,924
3,507,593
(21,754)
12,515,763
Capital assets, being depreciated:
Buildings and improvements
17,889,014
-
(44,202)
17,844,812
Improvements other than buildings
7,174,952
16,320
-
7,191,272
Infrastructure
23,069,816
320,514
-
23,390,330
Machinery and equipment
12,177,344
1,361,484
(1,347,229)
12,191,599
Total capital assets being depreciated
60,311,126
1,698,318
(1,391,431)
60,618,013
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Buildings
7,516,476
892,731
(2,668)
8,406,539
Improvements other than buildings
3,779,703
358,468
-
4,138,171
Machinery and equipment
6,830,709
1,164,641
(1,037,759)
6,957,591
Infrastructure
11,508,183
994,671
-
12,502,854
,
Total accumulated depreciation
29,635,071
3,410,511
(1,040,427)
32,005,155
Total capital assets, being depreciated, net
30,676,055
(1,712,193)
(351,004)
28,612,858
,
Governmental activities capital assets, net
$ 39,705,979
$ 1,795,400
$ (372,758)
$ 41,128,621
56
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS •
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
4. Capital Assets - Continued
Beginning
Ending
Balance
Retirements &
Balance
10/01/03
Additions Adjustments
09/30/04
Business -type activities:
Capital assets, not being depreciated:
Land
$ 2,350,478
$ 389,372 $ -
$ 2,739,850
Construction in progress
165,981
457,651 =
623,632
Total capital assets, not being depreciated
2,516,459
847,023
3,363,482
Capital assets, being depreciated
Buildings and improvements
1,157,184
- (104,302)
1,052,882
Improvements other than buildings
62,085,457
121,303 (6,187)
62,200,573
Machinery and equipment
499,049
19,769 (55,758)
463,060
Total capital assets, being depreciated
63,741,690
141,072 (166,247)
63,716,515
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Buildings and improvements
606,569
51,162
-
657,731
Improvements other than buildings
30,084,389
1,889,011
-
31,973,400
Machinery and equipment
374,056
25,127
(60,912)
338,271
Total accumulated depreciation
31,065,014
1,965,301
(60,912)
32,969,403
Total capital assets, being depreciated net
32,676,676
(1,824,229)
(105,335)
30,747,112
Business -type activities capital assets, net
$ 35,193,135
$ (977,206)
$ (105,335)
$ 34,110,594
1
.1
ii
1 57
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
4. Capital Assets - Continued
Depreciation expense was charged to functions/programs of the primary government as follows:
Governmental activities:
General government $ 311,383
Public safety 294,343
Public works 1,082,052
Culture and Recreation 573,086
Capital assets held by the government's internal service funds are
charged to the various functions based on their usage of the assets 1,147,524
Total depreciation expense - governmental activities $ 3,408,388
Business -type activities:
Water & Sewer Services $1,702,281
Airport 128,543
Golf Course 159,880
Sylvan Beach Pavillion 17,858
Total depreciation expense - business -type activities $ 2,008,562
The City has active construction projects as of September 30, 2004. Total accumulated commitments for
ongoing capital projects are composed of the following:
Utility Capital Projects Fund
Sylvan'Beach Fund
Airport Fund
Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax Fund
Section 4B Sales Tax
TIRZ Fund
General CIP
S1998 General Obligation Bonds
S2000 General Obligation Bonds
S2002 General Obligation Bonds
Total
Remaining
Construction
Contract
In Progress
Balance
$ 526,082
$ 10,622
34,905
-
5,786
-
33,765
-
748,445
-
20,491
-
678,315
105,900
128,153
114,444
195,747 -
3,090,153 -
$ 5,461,842 $ 230,966
58
• CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS •
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
5. Long Term Liabilities
At September 30, 2004, bonds payable consisted of the following individual issues:
Governmental Business -type
1994 General Obligation Refunding Serial Bonds,
due in annual installments of $680,000 to $1,090,000
through February 15, 2005; interest at 4.30% to 5.1%
1994 Waterworks and Sewer System Refunding Revenue Bonds,
due in annual installments of $95,000 to $455,000
through March 16, 2006; interest at 4.4% to 5.25%
1998 General Obligation Serial Bonds;
due in annual installments of $125,000
through March 15, 2019; interest at 4.25% to 6.25%
1998 Waterworks and Sewer System Revenue Bonds
due in annual installments of $125,000
through March 15, 2009; interest at 4.35% to 6.2%
1999 La Porte Area Water Authority Contract Revenue Refunding Bonds
due in annual payments through March 15, 2017; interest at 7% to 7.5%
2000 General Obligation Serial Bonds
due in annual installments of $150,000 through March 15, 2010,
changing to $175,000 through March 15, 2020; interest at 5% to 7%
2000 Certificates of Obligation
due in annual installments of $150,000
through March 15, 2020; interest at 5% to 7%
2002 Limited Tax Bonds
due in annual installments of $270,000
through March 15, 2025; interest at 4.25% to 5%
Total Bonds Payable
11
$ 905,000
$ 585,000
1,875,000
625,000
6,904,178
2,650,000
2,400,000
5,400,000
$13,230,000 $ 8,114,178
1 59
r-I
L7
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS —
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
6. Long Term Liabilities - Continued
Changes in Outstanding Debt -
Transactions for the year ended September 30, 2004 are summarized as follows:
Balance Issues
Balance
October 1, or
Payments or
September 30,
Due within
2002 Additions
Expenditures
2003
one year
Governmental Type Activities
General Obligation Bonds
$ 12,170,000 -
$ 1,340,000
$ 10,830,000
$ 1,671,536
Certificates of Obligation
2,550,000 -
150,000
2,400,000
280,050
Total governmental fund types
14,720,000 -
1,490,000
13,230,000
1,951,586
Business Type Activities
Revenue Bonds Payable
9,115,000 -
985,000
8,130,000
1,379,750
Less: Unamortized Refunding Loss
(31,642) -
(15,821)
(15,821)
(15,822)
Total business fund types
9,083,358 -
969,179
8,114,179
1,363,928
Total of all fund types
$ 23,803,358 $ -
$ 2,459,179
$ 21,344,179
$ 3,315,514
General Obligation Bonds and Certificates of Obligation -
General Obligation Bonds are direct obligations issued on a pledge of the general taxing power for the
payment of the debt obligations of the City. General Obligations Bonds and Certificates of Obligation
require the City to compute, at the time other taxes are levied, the rate of tax required to provide (in each
years bonds are outstanding) a fund to pay interest and principal at maturity. The City is in compliance with
this requirement.
Arbitrage provisions of the Internal Revenue Tax Act of 1986 require the City to rebate excess arbitrage
earnings from bond proceeds to the federal government. As provided for by the bond indentures, this
amount has been recorded as a liability in the General Fund for the benefit of the federal government and
will be paid as required by applicable regulations.
Certain General Obligation Bonds and Certificate of Obligations Bonds are to be repaid by revenues of the
proprietary funds.
.E
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
' Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
5. Long Term Liabilities - Continued
Revenue Bonds -
' Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds constitute special obligations of the City solely secured by a lien on and
pledge of the net revenues of the water and sewer system.
The Revenue Bonds are collateralized by the revenue of the water and sewer system and the various
special funds established by the bond ordinances. The ordinances provide that the revenue of the system is
to be used first to pay operating and maintenance expenses of the system and second to establish and
maintain the Revenue Bond funds. Remaining revenues may then be used for any lawful purpose. The
' ordinances also contain provisions, which, among other items, restrict the issuance of additional Revenue
Bonds unless the special funds noted above contain the required amounts and certain financial ratios are
met. The City is in compliance with all significant financial requirements as of September 30, 2003.
'
Below is a reconciliation of the various restricted cash and cash investments:
Current Maturities of Revenue Bonds,
$ 985,000.
Reserve for Revenue Bond Retirement
1,199,560
'
Total Reserve for Revenue Bond Retirement
2,184,560
'
Customer Deposits Payable
Total Restricted Cash and Cash Investments
368,730.
as of September 30, 2002
$ 2,553,290
1
1
1
1 61
0
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
5. Long Term Liabilities - Continued
Annual Requirements to Retire Debt Obligations -
The annual aggregate maturities for each bond type for the years subsequent to September 30, 2004, are
as follows:
General Obligation Bonds
Governmental Activities Business -type Activities
Year Ending
September 30
Principal
Interest Principal Interest
Total
2005
$ 1,180,000
$ 491,535 $ - $ -
$ 1,671,535
2006
545,000
444,408 - -
989,408
2007
545,000
414,620 - -
959,620
2008-2012
2,775,000
1,663,122 - -
4,438,122
2013-2017
2,850,000
1,023,009 - -
3,873,009
2018-2022
2,125,000
411,868 - -
2,536,868
2023-2026
810,000
60,615 - -
870,615
Total
$10,830,000
$ 4,509,177 $ - $ -
$15,332,177
Certificate of Obligations
Governmental Activities
Business -type Activities
Year Ending
September 30
Principal
Interest Principal Interest
Total
2005
$ 150,000
$ 130,050 $ - $ -
$ 280,050
2006
150,000
119,550 - -
269,550
2007
150,000
109,050 - -
259,050
2008-2012
750,000
400,500 - -
1,150,500
2013-2017
750,000
206,250 - -
956,250
2018-2020
450,000
33,750 - -
483,750
Total
$ 2,400,000
$ 999,150 $ - $ -
$ 3,399,150
Revenue Bonds
Governmental Activities
Business -type Activities
Year Ending
September 30 Principal Interest
Principal
Interest
Total
2005 $ - $ -
$ 985,000
$ 394,749
$ 1,379,749
2006 - -
715,000
349,431
1,064,431
2007 - -
585,000
314,263
899,263
2008-2012 - -
2,895,000
1,086,606
3,981,606
2013-2017 - -
2,950,000
326,144
3,276,144
Total - - $ 8,130, 000 $ 2,471,193 $10,601,193 1
11
62
F
1
1
1
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
5. Long Term Liabilities - Continued
Bonds Authorized and Unissued -
At September 30, 2004, the City had $2,900,000 in Certificate of Obligations Bonds which were authorized
and unissued.
Defeased Bonds Outstanding -
In 1994, the City defeased certain general obligation and revenue bonds by placing the proceeds of the new
bonds in an irrevocable trust to provide for all future debt service payments on the old bonds. Accordingly,
the trust account assets and the liability for the defeased bonds are not included in the City's financial
statements.
In the 1994 refunding of the revenue bonds, the difference between the reacquisition price and the net
carrying amount of the old debt was $189,855 and is being amortized over the life of the new debt, which
was 12 years. The unamortized balance at September 30, 2004 is $15,822.
On September 30, 2000, $2.45 million of general obligation bonds .and $900 thousand of revenue bonds
outstanding are considered defeased. -On October 6, 1999, the La Porte Area Water Authority issued $8.08
million in Contract Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1999, with an average interest rate of 5.159 percent to
refund $8.08 million in outstanding Water Supply Contract Revenue Bonds, Series I and II, 1998 with an
average interest rate of 6.94 percent. The Authority completed the current refunding to reduce its total debt
service payments over the next 18 years by $1.476 million and to obtain an economic gain (difference
between the present values of the old and new debt service payments) of $1.048 million. The bonds are
payable from the net revenues of the Authority. The bonds are in $5,000 denominations. The Authority is in
compliance with all significant requirements and restrictions contained in the bond resolution.
S. Pension Benefits
Plan Descriptions
The City provides pension benefits for all of its full-time employees through a non-traditional, joint
contributory, hybrid defined benefit plan (the Plan) in the statewide Texas Municipal Retirement System
(TMRS), one of 794 administered by TMRS, an agent multiple -employer public employee retirement system.
A copy of the 2003 TMRS Comprehensive Annual Financial Report may be obtained by writing to P.O. Box
149153, Austin, Texas 78714. In addition, the city provides pension benefits to its volunteer firemen through
the Texas Statewide, Emergency Services Personnel Retirement Fund, one of 150 administered by the Fire
Fighters' Pension Commissioner, a cost sharing multiple employer pension system. That report may be
obtained by writing to Firefighters Pension Commission, P.O. Box 12577, Austin, Texas 78711. Both Plans
are more fully described below.
Texas Municipal Retirement System
Benefits depend upon the sum of the employee's contributions to the Plan, with interest, and the City
financed monetary credits, with interest. At the date the Plan began, the city granted monetary credits for
service rendered before the Plan began of a theoretical amount equal to two times what would have been
contributed by the employee, with interest, prior to the establishment of the Plan. Monetary credits for
service since the Plan began are a percentage (100%, 150%, or 200%) of the employee's accumulated
contributions. In addition, the City can grant annually another type of monetary credit referred to as an
updated service credit which is a theoretical amount which, when added to the employee's accumulated
contributions and the monetary credits for service since the Plan began, would be the total monetary credits
and employee's contributions accumulated with interest if the employee's contribution rate and City's
matching percentage had always been in existence and if the employee's salary had always been the
average of his salary in the last three years and that are one year before the effective date. At retirement,
the benefit is calculated as if the sum of the employee's accumulated contributions with interest and the
employer -finance monetary credits with interest were used to purchase an annuity.
63
i
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
6. Pension Benefits - Continued
Members can retire at ages 60 and above with 10 or more years of service or with 20 years of service
regardless of age. The Plan also provides death and disability benefits. A member is vested after 10 years.
The Plan provisions are adopted by the governing body of the City, within the options available in the state
statutes governing the TMRS and within the actuarial constraints also in the statutes.
Contributions
The contribution rate for employees is 7 percent and the City's matching ratio is currently 2 to 1, both as
adopted by the governing body of the City. Under the state law governing TMRS, the actuary annually
determines the City's contribution rate. This rate consists of the normal cost contribution rate and the prior
service contribution rate, both of which are calculated to be a level percentage of payroll from year to year.
The normal cost contribution rate financing the currently accruing monetary credits is due to the City's
matching percentage, which is the obligation of the City as of an employee's retirement date, not at the time
the employee's contributions are made. The normal cost contribution rate is the actuarially determined
percentage of payroll necessary to satisfy the obligation of the City to each employee at the time his
retirement becomes effective. The prior service contribution rate amortizes the unfounded (over funded)
actuarial liability (asset) over the Plan's 25-year amortization period. When the City periodically adopts
updated service credits and increases in annuities, in effect, the increased unfounded actuarial liability is to
be amortized over a new 25-year period. Currently, the unfounded actuarial liability is being amortized over
the 25-year period, which began January 1998. The unit credit actuarial cost method is used for
determining the City's contribution rate. Both the employees and the City make contributions monthly.
Since the City needs to know its contribution rate in advance for budgetary purposes, there is a one-year
delay between the actuarial valuation that is the basis for the rate and the calendar year when the rate goes
into effect. A summary of actuarial assumptions is presented below:
Actuarial Valuation Date
Actuarial Cost Method
Amortization Method
Remaining Amortization Period
Asset Valuation Method
Investment Rate of Return
Projected Salary Increases
Inflation Rate
Cost of Living Adjustment
Annual
Fiscal
Pension
Year
Cost (APC)
2001
$ 1,668,836
2002
1,665,210
2003
1,802,728
December 30, 2003
Unit Credit
Level Percent of Payroll
25 Years - Open Period
Amortized Cost
7%
None
None
None
Percentage
of APC Net Pension
Contribution Obligation
100%
100% -
100% -
Additional supplementary three-year trend information may be found on page 69.
64
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
r Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
6. Pension Benefits - Continued
Texas Statewide Emergency Services Personnel Retirement Fund
rSummary of Significant Accounting Policies and Plan Asset Matters
The Texas Statewide Emergency Services Personnel Retirement Fund financial statements are prepared
using the accrual basis of accounting. The Fund's fiscal year is from September 1 through the following
r August 31. Contributions are recognized as revenues in the period in which they are due to the Fund. No
contributions applicable to the H.B. 258 Texas Local Fire Fighters Retirement Act (TLFFRA) are included
herein.
' The Texas Statewide Emergency Services Personnel Retirement Fund investments are reported at a
smoothed market -related value.
rPlan Description
The Fire Fighters' Pension Commission is the administrator of the Texas Statewide Emergency Services
Personnel Retirement Fund, a cost sharing multiple employer pension system established and administered
by the State of Texas to provide pension benefits for emergency services personnel who serve without
monetary - remuneration. The Texas Statewide Emergency Services Personnel Retirement Fund is
considered a component unit of the State of Texas financial reporting entity and is included in the State's
financial reports as a pension trust fund. At August 31, 2002 there were 173 member departments
participating in the pension system. The following table summarizes the pension system membership as of
August 31, 2002:
r Retirees and beneficiaries currently receiving benefits 1,422
Terminated members entitled to benefits but not yet receiving those 1,629
Current active members (vested and non -vested) 4,618
rThe pension system was created by Senate Bill 411, 65th Legislature, Regular Session (1977). Benefit
provisions include retirements benefits as well and death and disability benefits. Members are vested at the
beginning of the fifth year of service, at 5% per year of service for the first ten years and 10% for each of the
next five years of service.
Upon reaching age 55, a vested member may retire and receive a monthly pension equal to his vested
percentage multiplied by six times the governing body's average monthly contribution over the member's
years of qualified service. For years of service in excess of 15 years, this monthly benefit is increased at the
rate of 7% compounded annually.
' Death and disability benefits are dependent on whether or not the member was engaged in the performance
of duties at the time of death or disability. Death benefits include a lump -sum amount and continuing
monthly payments to a member's surviving spouse and/or dependents.
rContribution requirements were established by S.B. 411, 65th Legislative, Regular Session (1977) and no
contributions are required by members. The governing bodies of participating department members are
required to contribute at least $12 per month for each member. Additional contributions may be necessary
' to pay for unfunded prior service costs and "buybacks" of vested benefits. The State may also be required
to make a limited amount of annual contributions to make the fund actuarially sound.
' Contributions Required and Contributions Made
As previously stated the required contribution of at least $12 per member per month is not actuarially
determined. The minimum contribution amount was established by S.B. 411, 65th Legislature, Regular
r Session (1977). For the fiscal year ending August 31, 2002, contributions totaling $1,768,059 for dues and
prior service were paid into the fund by the governing bodies sponsoring the member participating
departments. The contributions made were equal to the contributions required.
65
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS Ir
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
S. Pension Benefits - Continued
The purpose for the biennial actuarial valuations is to test the adequacy of the monthly contributions and
determine if they are adequate to fund the benefits that are promised. The actuarial valuation at August 31,
2002 revealed for the first time an inadequacy of the expected contributions. The total contributions
expected from the governing bodies sponsoring the members for the fiscal year ending August 31, 2003 are
$946,388 less than the minimum required contributions for that fiscal year, based on amortizing the
unfunded actuarial accrued liability over 30 years.
7. Interfund Transfers
Interfund transfers during the year ended September 30, 2004 were as follows:
General Fund
Non -Major Governmental
Internal Service
Debt Service
Capital Projects
utility
La Porte Area Water Authority
Golf
Sylvan Beach
2000 GO Bond
Hotel/Motel
Airport
Total
Transfers In Transfers Out
$ 383,243 $ 862,766
1,034,797 28,269
-
862,577
1,250,000
1,680,033
-
54,650
35,000
36,644
20,000
4,605
862,577
-
-
55,000
-
1,073
$ 3,585,817 $ 3,585,617
C�
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
' Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
8. Risk Management
' The City is exposed to various risks related to torts: theft, damage to, and destruction of assets; errors and
omissions; and natural disasters. The City's risk management program encompasses various means of
protecting the City against loss by obtaining property, casualty, and liability coverage from participation in a
risk pool. The participation of the City in the risk pool is limited to the payment of premiums. Further
information regarding the pool is provided below. Settled claims have not exceeded insurance coverage in
any of the previous three fiscal years. There has not been any significant reduction in insurance coverage
' from that of the previous year.
Health Insurance Benefits
' The City self -insures a portion of health insurance benefits provided to employees. The City records
revenues and expenses for providing employee health coverage in an Internal Service Fund and accrues
the estimated incurred but not reported claims. Charges are assessed to various City divisions based on
' their full-time employee count.
Activity during the year included:
Revenues:
Charges to divisions $ 2,094,734
Charges to employees 278,764
' Charges to retirees 26,994
Charges to COBRA participants 4,009
Total revenues 2,404,501
' Expenses:
Claims administration 53,371
Claimes incurred 3,304,198
Re -insurance premiums 190,227
Other benefits -
Consulting fees 4,787
Total health services expenses $ 3,552,583
Included in the claims paid amount is $226,387 for incurred but not reported claims.
Settled claims have not exceeded insurance coverage in any of the previous four fiscal years. Estimates of
claims payable and of claims incurred but not reported at September 30, 2003 are reflected as liabilities of
the Internal Service Fund. Because actual claims liabilities depend on such complex factors as inflation,
changes in legal requirements, and damage awards, the process used in computing claims liability is an
estimate based on historical claims. Analysis of claims liability for the fiscal years 2001, 2002 and 2003 are
' as follows:
Beginning Current Payment End of
' of Year Year for Year
Accrual Estimates Claims Accrual
Fiscal Year 2002 $ 218,609 $ 2,043,304 $ 2,077,832 $184,081
' Fiscal Year 2003 184,081 2,194,142 2,214,771 163,452
Fiscal Year 2004 163,452 3,304,198 3,241,263 226,387
67
0 CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Notes to the Financial Statements - Continued
September 30, 2004
8. Risk Management - Continued
Risk Pool
The City is a member of the Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool, an unincorporated
association of 1,860 political subdivisions of the State of Texas. The Pool contracts with a third party
administrator for administration, investigation and adjustment services in the handling of claims. All loss
contingencies, including claims incurred but not reported, if any, are recorded and accounted for by the
Pool.
9. Commitments and Contingent Liabilities
From time to time, the City is a defendant in legal proceedings relating to its operations as a municipality. In
the best judgment of the City's management, the outcome of any pending legal proceedings will not have an
adverse effect on the accompanying general purpose financial statements.
The City participates in certain federal and state assisted grant programs. These programs are subject to
program compliance audits by the grantors or their representatives. Any liability for reimbursement which
may arise as the result of these audits is not believed to be material.
10. Post -Employment Benefits
In addition to pension benefits described in Note 6, employees who retire from the City and are eligible for
pension benefits shall be provided medical coverage by the City to the extent and subject to the conditions
of such coverage that is provided to current employees of the City. This coverage for retired employees is
provided at the option of City council through adoption of the annual budget. The City funds these
premiums in the same manner as it funds similar premiums for current employees.
Employees, who retired from the City before October 1, 1992, have 100% of their coverage paid for by the
City. Employees who retired from the City in 1993 and up to December 31, 1999, with 20 or more years of
service have 100% of their coverage paid for by the City. Prior to January 1, 2000, employees who have 15
years but less than 20 years of service are required to pay for 10% of the cost and employees who have 10
years but less than 15 years of service are required to pay for 20% of their costs. For employees who retire
after January 1, 2000 the following applies:
Years of Service with City
Retiree Cost
CRY Cost
Retiree Cost Per Year
At least 10 but less than 15 years
55%
45%
$2,750
At least 15 but less than 20 years
25%
75%
1,250
At least 20 years
0%
100%
0
The costs of providing these benefits and number of retired employees are as follows:
Dependent Number of
Total Cost City's Cost Coverage Cost Retired Employees
$197,750 $175,250 $22,500 43
Retirees who are entitled to receive retirement benefits under the City's retirement plan may purchase
continued health benefits for the retiree and the retiree's dependents. The person must inform the City no
later than the day on which the person retires that the person elects to continue coverage. If the retiree
elects to continue coverage for himself and/or his dependents, once he decides to drop either type of
coverage, the person and/or his dependents become eligible for coverage at the next open enrollment
period. The level of coverage provided is the same level of coverage provided to current employees. The
City's coverage is secondary to Medicare when the person becomes eligible for those benefits. Payment for
dependent coverage will be at the same rate as payments for current employees.
m
' Required Supplementary Information
Texas Municipal Retirement System
Schedule of Funding Progress
For the Last Three Fiscal Years
'
Actuarial
Accrued
UAAL as a
'
Actuarial
Liability
Unfunded
Covered
Percentage
of Covered
Actuarial
Value of
(AAL) -
AAL
Funded
Valuation
Assets
Entry Age
(UAAL)
Ratio
Payroll
Payroll
Date
(a)
(b)
(b-a)
(a/b)
(c)
((b-a)/c]
'
2000
$ 37,940,360
$ 44,026,509
$ 6,085,549
86.2%
$13,756,651
44.2
2002
39,061,267
45,901,424
6,840,157
85.1
14,198,959
48.2
'
2003
42,858,965
52,192,452
9,333,487
82.1
14,457,226
64.6
1
L
I!
1
1 69
LJ
0
(A
re wo
70
' COMBINING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
' NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
Special Revenue Funds
' Special revenue funds are used to account for specific revenues that are legally restricted to expenditure for
particular purposes.
' Grant Fund — This fund is used to account for funds received from another government or organization to be
used for a specific purpose, activity or facility.
' Community Investment Fund — This fund is used to account for funds received and expended on community
beautification and revitalization programs.
t Hotel / Motel Occupancy Tax Fund — This fund is used to account for the accumulation of resources from the
Hotel/Motel Tax assessment levied by the City. These monies are to be spent to promote the development or
progress of the City within the guidelines set forth on disposition of revenues collected under the authority of the
Texas Hotel Occupancy Act (Article 1269; Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes).
Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone One Fund (TIRZ) — This fund is used to account for the disposition of
property taxes collected on specific parcels within the boundaries of the TIRZ for the exclusive benefit of the
' City's capital improvement programs.
Capital Projects Funds
' Capital projects funds are used to account for the acquisition and construction of major capital facilities other
than those financed by proprietary funds.
' Capital Improvements Fund — This fund is used to account for capital projects that are normally small in nature
and effect the general operation of the City.
Transportation and Other Infrastructure Fund — This fund is used to account for the construction and expansion
' of roads, bridges, sidewalks and other major infrastructure capital improvements.
1998 General Obligation Bonds Fund — This fund is used to account for the proceeds and expenditures related
to drainage and street improvements throughout the City.
' 2000 Certificate of Obligation Bonds Fund — This fund is used to account for the proceeds and expenditures for
construction of the community library.
2000 General Obligation Bonds Fund — This fund is used to account for the proceeds and expenditures for
construction to renovate the city hall building, public swimming pool and two fire stations.
' 2002 General Obligation Bonds Fund — This fund is used to account for the proceeds and expenditures for the
construction of a wastewater treatment plant.
1
71
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Combining Balance Sheet
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
1
September 30, 2004
1
Special Revenue Funds
Hotel/Motel
Tax Increment
Community Occupancy
Reinvestment
Capital
Grant Investment
Tax
Zone One (TIRZ)
Totals
Projects
ASSETS
Cash and cash equivalents
$
(26,245) $ 59,603 $
562,904
$ 96,361
$ 692,623
$ 733,3
Investments
- 24,349
229,963
39,366
293,678
302,
Taxes receivable
Grant receivable
- -
- -
-
-
-
'
4,711
Other receivables
130.451 -
-
-
130,451
Accrued interest receivable
12 139
1,304
242
1,697
1,695
Total assets
104,218 84,091
794,171
135,969
1,118,449
1,041,
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable
Accrued salaries payable
5,281 55
7,128 -
8,608
-
2,175
-
16,119
7,128
205,9
3
Retainage payable
- -
1
Deferred Revenue
Total liabilities
90,043.00 -
102,452 55
-
-
90,043
206,1
113,290
2,175
8,608
Fund Balances:
Reserved for.
Capital projects
-
-
-
J
Unreserved
1,766 84,036
785,563
133,794
1,005,159
835,
Total fund balances
1,766 64,036
785,563
133,794
1,005,159
835,720
Total liabilities and fund balances
$
104,218 $ 84,091 $
794,171
$ 135,969
$ 1,118,449
J
11
1
1
u
72 1
Capital Projects Funds
Transportation
1998 General
2000 Certificate
2000 General
2002 General
Total Nonmajor
B Other
Obligation
of Obligation
Obligation
Obligation
Governmental
Infrastructure
Bonds
Bonds
Bonds
Bonds
Totals
Funds
'
$ 533,022
$ 1,071,481
$ 340,284
$ 908,018
$ 1,854,692
$ 5,440,866
$ 6,133,489
217,756
437,733
1,855
339,726
121,059
1,420,191
1,713,869
-
4,716
4,716
'
130,451451
1,236
2,483
11
1,926
686
8,037
9,734
752,014
1,511,697
342,150
1,249,670
1,976,437
6,873,810
7,992,259
'
24,028
25,720
25,714
150,054
431,470
447,589
7,128
168
168
_
_
-
_
_
_
90,043
'
-
24,028
25,720
25,714
150,054
431,638
544,928
'
752,014
1,487,669
316,430
1,223,956
1,826,383
6,442,172
7,447,331
752,014
1,487,669
316,430
1,223,956
1,826,383
6,442,172
7,447,331
$ 752,014
$ 1,511,697
$ 342,150
$ 1,249,670
$ 1,176,437
$ 6,1173,810
$ 7,992,259
'
1
73
•
®
1
CITY OF LA PORTE,
TEXAS
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in
Fund Balances
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
1
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
1
Special Revenue Funds
Hotel/Motel Tax Increment
Community
Occupancy
Reinvestment
Capital
Grant Investment
Tax
Zone One (TIRZ)
Totals
Projects
REVENUES
Property taxes
$ - $ -
$ -
$ 15,764
$ 15,764
$ -
1
Intergovemmental
562,576 -
-
-
562,576
6,100
Sales taxes
Other taxes
0
0 -
-
232,023
-
232,023
-
-
1
Interest
0 2,788
9,111
1,625
13,524
29,246
Charges for services
-
-
-
-
(1,240)
Total revenues
562,576 2,788
241,134
17,389
823,887
34,106
1
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Administration
560,810 82,158
117,231
32,066
792,265
1,400,457
Capital Outlay
- 540,729
2,482
(31)
543,180
1
Total expenditures
560,810 622,887
119,713
32,035
1,335,445
1,400,457
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures
1,766 (620,099)
121,421
(14,646)
(511,558)
(1,366,351)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
-
-
-
"
Transfers in
- 300,000
-
-
300,000
500,000
Transfers out
- -
(55,000)
-
(55,000)
(1,948,091)
Total other financing sources (uses)
- 300,000
(55,000)
-
245,000
(1,448,091)
Net change in fund balances
1,766 (320,099)
66,421
(14,646)
(266,558)
(2,814,442)'
Fund balances -beginning
- 404,135
719,142
148,"0
1,271,717
3,650,162
Fund balances ending
$ 1,766 $ 84,036
$ 785,563
$ 133,794
$ 1,005,159
$ 835,720
.
1
7
I
7
74 1
F
L
1
1
1
k
1
1
Capital Projects Funds
Transportation
1998 General
2000 Certificate
2000 General
2002 General
Total Nonmajor
& Other
Obligation
of Obligation
Obligation
Obligation
Governmental
Infrastructure
Bonds
Bonds
Bonds
Bonds
Totals
Funds
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 15,764
-
-
-
-
-
6,100
568,676
-
-
-
-
-
-
232,023
15,375
17,876
4,075
11,057
26,440
104,069
117,593
-
-
-
-
-
(1,240)
(1,240)
15,375
17,876
4,075
11,057
26,440
108,929
932,816
172,000
-
-
-
1,572,457
2,364,722
-
114,284
-
2,525
1,913,352
2,030,161
2,573,341
172,000
114,284
-
2,525
1,913,352
3,602,618
4,938,063
(156,625)
(96,408)
4,075
8,532
(1,886,912)
(3,493,689)
(4,005,247)
862,577
412,692
1,775,269
2,075,269
(625,000)
-
-
-
-
(2,573,091)
(2,628,091)
(625,000)
-
-
862,577
412,692
(797,822)
(552,822)
(781,625)
(96,408)
4,075
871,109
(1,474,220)
(4,291,511)
(4,558,069)
1,533,639
1,584,077
312,355
352,847
3,300,603
10,733,683
12,005,400
$ 752,014
$ 1,487,669
$ 316,430
$ 1,223,956
$ 1,826,383
$ 6,442,172
$ 7,447,331
ev,
EW
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
•
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES and
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE — BUDGET and ACTUAL
Debt Service Fund
Special Revenue Funds
Capital Projects Funds
77
•
®
1
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Debt Service Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes
in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For
the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Variance with
Final Budget
1
Budgeted Amounts
Positive
Original Final
Actual Amounts
(Negative)
REVENUES
Property taxes
$1,866,361 $1,866,361
$ 1,952,758
$ 86,397
Industrial payments
Interest
-
28,090 28,090
24,360
'
(3,730)
Total revenues
1,894,451 1,894,451
1,977,118
82,667
1
EXPENDITURES
Debt Service:
1
Principal
1,490,000 1,490,000
1,490,000
-
Interest
699,834 699,834
699,834
-
Total expenditures
2,189,834 2,189,834
2,189,834
-
1
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures
(295,383) (295,383)
(212,716)
82,667
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in
-
-
Net change in fund balances
(295,383) (295,383)
(212,716)
82,667
1
Fund balances —beginning
1,797,213 1,797,213
1,797,213
-
Fund balances —ending
1,501,830 $1,501,830
$ 1,584,497
$ 82,667
78
1
1
1
1
• CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS •
Grant Special Revenue Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes ih Fund Balance
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
REVENUES
Actual Amounts
Variance with
Final Budget
Positive
(Negative)
Intergovernmental
- $ 352,136
562,576
$ 210,440
Interest
- -
-
-
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Administration
- 225,044
560,610.
(335,766)
Capital Outlay
- -
-
-
Total expenditures
- 225,044
560,810
(335,766)
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
. expenditures
- 127,092
1,766
(125,326)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in
- -
-
-
Transfers out
- -
-
-
Total other financing sources (uses)
- -
-
-
Net change in fund balances
- 127,092
1,766
(125,326)
Fund balances —beginning
- -
-
-
Fund balances —ending $
- $ 127,092 $
1,766
$ (125,326)
79
• 0
1
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Community Investment Special Revenue Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts
Positive
Original Final Actual Amounts
(Negative)
REVENUES
Interest
$ 8,390 $ 8,390 $ 2,788
$ (5,602)
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Administration
110,000 120,000 82,158
37,842
Capital Outlay
10,000 550,000 540,729
9,271
Total expenditures
120,000 670,000 622,887
47,113
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures (111,610) (661,610)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in - 300,000
Transfers out - -
620,099 41,511 1
Total other financing sources (uses) - 300,000 300,000 -
Net change in fund balances (111,610) (361,610) (320,099) 41,511
Fund balances —beginning 404,135 404,135 404,135 -
Fund balances —ending 292,525 $ 42,525 $ 84,036 $ 41,511
Del
1
1
I�
1
1
• CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS •
Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax Special Revenue Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes ih Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted
Amounts
Actual
Positive
Original
Final
Amounts
(Negative)
REVENUES
Other taxes
$ 250,000
$ 250,000
$ 232,023
$ (17,977)
Interest
10,100
10,100
9,111
(989)
Total revenues
260,100
260,100
241,134
(18,966)
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Administration
144,100
169,100
117,231
51,869
Capital Outlay
25,000
-
2,482
(2,482)
Total expenditures
169,100
169,100
119,713
49,387
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures 91,000 91,000 121,421 30,421
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers out
(55,000)
(55,000)
(55,000) -
Net change in fund balances
36,000
36,000
66,421 30,421
Fund balances -beginning
713,142
719,142
719,142 -
Fund balances -ending
$ 749,142
$ 755,142
$ 785,563 $ 30,421
81
•
11
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone One Special Revenue Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
REVENUES
Property taxes
Interest
Total revenues
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Administration
Capital Outlay
Total expenditures
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
. expenditures
Net change in fund balances
Fund Balances —beginning
Fund Balances riding
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted
Amounts
Actual
Positive
Original
Final
Amounts
(Negative)
$ 14,000
$ 14,000
$ 15,764
$ 1,764
2,090
2,090
1,625
(465)
16,090
16,090
17,389
1,299
30,000
30,000
32,066
(2,066)
-
486,435
(31)
486,466
30,000
516,435
32,035
484,400
(13,910)
(500,345)
(14,646)
485,699
(13,910)
,.(500,345)
(14,646)
485,699
148,440
.148,440
148,440
-
$ 134,530
$ (351,905)
$ 133,794
$ 485,699
82
'
•
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Capital Projects
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For
the Year Ended September 30, 2004
'
Variance with
Final Budget
'
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Positive
(Negative)
REVENUES
Charges for Services
$ - $ -
$ (1,240)
$ -
'
Intergovernmental
- -
6,100
6,100
Interest
65,180 65,180
29,246
(35,934)
Total revenues
65,180 65,180
34,106
(29,834)
'
EXPENDITURES
Current:
'
Administration
Capital Outlay
- -
95
1,190,400 1,993,5457
-
1,400,
-
593,138
Total expenditures
1,190,400 1,993,595
1,400,457
593,138
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
'
expenditures
(1,125,220) (1,928,415)
(1,366,351)
563,304
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in
- 500,000
500,000
Transfers out
(862,577) (1,948,091)
(1,948,091)
Net change in fund balances
(1,987,797) (3,376,506)
(2,814,442)
562,064
'
Fund balances —beginning
3,650,162 3,650,162
3,650,162
Fund balances —ending
$ 1,662,365 $ 273,656
$ 835,720
$ 562,064
J
83
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Transportation and Other Infrastructure Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
Interest $ 24,630 $ 24,630 $ 15,375 $ (9,255)
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Administration
125,000
125,000
172,000
(47,000)
Total expenditures
125,000
125,000
172,000
(47,000)
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures
(100,370)
(100,370)
(156,625)
(56,255)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers out
-
(625,000)
(625,000)
-
Net change in fund balances
(100,370)
(725,370)
(781,625)
(56,255)
Fund balances —beginning
1,533,639
1,533,639
1,533,639
-
Fund balances —ending
$ 1,433,269
$ 808,269
$ 752,014
$ (56,255)
84
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
1998 General Obligation Bonds Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Positive
(Negative)
REVENUES
Interest
$ 5,000 $ 5,000
$ 17,876
$ 12,876
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Capital Outlay
217,291 217,291
114,284
103,007
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures
(212,291) (212,291)
(96,408)
115,883
Net change in fund balances
(212,291) (212,291)
(96,408)
115,883
Fund balances —beginning
1,584,077 1,584,077
1,584,077
-
'
Fund balances —ending
$ 1,371,786 $ 1,371,786
$ 1,487,669
$ 115,883
11
1
1
85
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
2000 Certificate of Obligation Bonds Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts
Actual
Positive
Original Final
Amounts
(Negative)
REVENUES
Interest
$ - $ -
$ 4,075
$ 4,075
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Capital Outlay
-
-
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
-
4,075
4,075
expenditures
-
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers out
Net change in fund balances
-
4,075
4,075
Fund balances —beginning
312,355 312,355
312,355
-
Fund balances —ending
$ 312,355 $ 312,355
$ 316,430
$ 4,075
86
'
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
2000 General Obligation Bonds Fund
Schedule of Revenues; Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Variance with
Final Budget
1
Budgeted Amounts
Original Final
Actual
Amounts
Positive
(Negative)
REVENUES
Interest $ 5,000 $ 5,000
$ 11,057
$ 6,057
EXPENDITURES
Current:
'
Capital Outlay 950,000 200,000
2,525
197,475
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures (945,000) (195,000)
8,532
203,532
'
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in 862,577 862,577
862,577
-
'
Net change in fund balances (82,423) 667,577
871,109
203,532
Fund balances —beginning 352,847 352,847
352,847
-
Fund balances —ending $ 270,424 $ 1,020,424
$ 1,223,956
$ 203,532
1
1
1
1
87
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
2002 General Obligation Bonds Fund
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
REVENUES
Interest $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 26,440 $ (23,560)
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Capital Outlay
120,000
120,000
1,913,352
(1,793,352)
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures
(70,000)
(70,000)
(1,886,912)
(1,816,912)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in
-
412,692
412,692
-
Net change in fund balances
(70,000)
342,692
(1,474,220)
(1,816,912)
Fund balances —beginning
3,300,603
3,300,603
3,300,603
-
Fund balances —ending
$ 3,230,603
$ 3,643,295
$ 1,826,383
$ (1,816,912)
88
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
SUPPLEMENTARY INDIVIDUAL FUND FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES
General Fund
These supplementary statements and schedules are included to provide management additional information for
financial analysis.
89
0 0
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
General Fund
Schedule of Revenues - Budget and Actual
Year Ended September 30, 2004
Taxes:
Ad valorem:
Current
Delinquent
Industrial Payments
Total ad valorem
Penalty and interest
Sales Taxes
Other Taxes
Franchise Fees:
Electrical
Gas
Telephone
Cable
Commercial Solidwaste
Total Franchise Fees
Charges for Services:
Public safety service fees
Health and sanitation service fees
Culture and recreation fees
Other service fees
Total Charges for Services
Intergovernmental
Licenses and permits:
Building permits
Licenses
Total Licenses and permits
Investment income
Fines and forfeitures
Miscellaneous
Total revenues
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
$ 8,570,771 $ 8,570,771
140,000
140,000
7,179,487
7,179,487
15, 890, 258
15, 890, 258
95,000
95,000
1,859,760 1,859,760
35,000 35,000
$ 8,917,871
$ 347,100
62,602
(77,398)
6,896,112
(283, 375)
15,876,585
(13,673)
121,194
28,194
1,995,654
135,894
37,955
2,955
1,100,000
1,100,000
1,158,284
58,284
110,000
110,000
147,202
37,202
265,000
265,000
230,287
(34,713)
110,000
110,000
188,548
58,548
20,000
20,000
18,554
(3,446)
1,605,000
1,605,000
1,718,875
113,875
850,829
1,000,829
908,000
1,208,000
414,100
525,179
1,149,288
235,390
3,322,217
2,969,398
350,000
-
899,949 (100,880)
1,157,449 (50,551)
484,320 (40,859)
301,924 66,534
304,285 (2,665,113)
7,586 7,586
190,700
539,499
250,850
(288,649)
26,250
30,270
69,555
39,285
216,950
569,769
320,405
(249,364)
226,770
226,770
149,347
(77,423)
653,950
653,950
554,559
(99,391)
30,000 30,000
$ 24,284,905 $ 23,934,905
32,605 2,605
$ 21,119,050 $ (2,815,655)
I
90
1
11
1
J
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS0
General Fund
Schedule of Expenditures - Budget and Actual
Year Ended September 30, 2004
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Administration:
1 Emergency Management:
Personal services
Supplies
' Other services and charges
Capital Outlay
Total Emergency Management
General Administration:
'
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
'
Total General Administration
Community Investment:
'
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Total Community Investment
'
Human Resources:
Personal services
Supplies
'
Other services and charges
Total Human Resources
1
1
Municipal Court:
Personal services
Supplies and materials
Other services -and charges
Total Municipal Court
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
$ -
$ 44,361
$ 32,170
$ 12,191
-
2,309
524
1,785
-
29,620
10,315
19,305,
19,639
(19,639)
-
76,290
62,648
13,642
399,968
399,968
412,508
(12,540)
8,110
8,110
7,578
532
101,823
126,823
107,298
19,525
509,901
534,901
527,384
7,517
-
28,085
16,373
11,712
-
4,850
2,157
2,693
-
67,065
588
66,477
-
100,000
19,118
80,882
164,888
149,888
182,651
(32, 763)
8,900
8,900
4,626
4,274
138,098
155,082
113,857
41,225
311,886
313,870
301,134
12,736
329,632
332,632
321,652
10,980
14,000
11,930
11,093
837
186,022
185,092
194,508
(9,416)
529,654
529,654
527,253
2,401
Purchasing:
Personal services
194,826
Supplies
3,105
Other services and charges
35,017
Total Purchasing
232,948
Management Information Services:
Personal services
-
Supplies
-
Other services and charges
-
Total Management Information Svcs
-
City Secretary:
Personal services
Supplies and materials
Other services and charges
Total City Secretary
194,826
186,956
7,870
2,894
2,696
198
35,228
35,023
205
232,948
224,675
8,273
-
45
(45)
-
121
(121)
-
(2,566)
2,566
-
(2,400)
2,400
239,195
206,752
9,036
9,038
98,113
91,213
346,344
307,001
214,153 (7,401)
3,154 5,882
97,286 (6,073)
314,593 (7,592)
91
Legal:
Personal services
Other services and charges
Total Legal
City Council:
Personal services
Supplies and materials
Other services and charges
Total City Council
Total Administration
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
5,000 5,000
208,969 208,969
213,969 213,969
5,000 -
201,066 7,903
206,066 7,903
26,400
26,400
24,488
1,912
10,500
10,500
10,027
473
85,568
85,568
51,864
33,704
122,468
122,468
86,379
36,089
2,267,170
2,431,101
2,266,850
69,727
Finance:
Accounting:
Personal services
585,204
625,497
624,692
805
Supplies
20,000
20,000
26,284
(6,284)
Other services and charges
153,874
153,874
203,321
(49,447)
Total Accounting
759,078
799,371
854,297
(54,926)
Nondepartmental:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Capital Outlay
Total Nondepartmental
Tax Office:
Personal services
Supplies and materials
Other services and charges
Total Tax Office
Total Finance
Planning and Engineering:
Planning and Engineering:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Capital Outlay
Total Planning and Engineering
Inspection:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Total Inspection
Total Planning and Engineering
TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT
210,497
210,497
-
5,000
809,040
850,840
5,000
5,000
1,024,537
1,071,137
346,581
(136,084)
1,910
3,090
433,797
416,843
-
5,000
782,288
288,849
142,627
175,070
172,476
2,594
11,300
11,300
10,088
1,212
175,347
175,647
168,379
7,268
329,274
362,017
350,943
11,074
2,112,889
2,232,525
1,987,528
244,997
626,281 626,281
16,150 19,350
116,380 130,280
758,811 775,911
640,808
(14,527)
14,471
4,879
121,144
9,136
776,423
(512)
495,222
495,222
442,971
52,251
18,995
19,795
14,974
4,821
163,733
186,222
117,816
68,406
677,950
701,239
575,761
125,478
1,436,761
1,477,160
1,352,184
124,966
5,816,820
6,140,776
5,606,662
439,690
92
' PUBLIC SAFETY:
' '
Fire
'
Fire Prevention:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Capital Outlay
Total Fire Prevention
' Emergency medical services:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
' Capital Outlay
Total Emergency Services
'
Total Fire
Police
Police Administration:
Personal services
'
Supplies
Other services and charges
Capital Outlay
Total Police Administration
Police Patrol:
' Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
' Capital Outlay
Total Police Patrol
Criminal Investigation:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Capital Outlay
Total Criminal Investigation
II
�I
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
155,516
155,516
135,119
20,397
10,250
12,750
12,207
543
47,930
45,430
39,803
5,627
213,696
213,696
167,129
26,567
1,123,406
1,080,653
1,116,474
(35,821)
151,270
146,270
116,043
30,227
356,687
368,662
333,607
35,055
20,000
20,000
-
20,000
1,651,363
1,615,585
1,566,124
49,461
1,180,235
1,147,334
1,188,006
(40,672)
120,935
115,001
84,050
30,951
178,076
149,945
149,542
403
1,479,246
1,412,280
1,421,598
(9,318)
3,344,305
3,241,561
3,174,851
66,710
472,770
20,672
210,854
27.431
731,727
3,684,449
148,528
554,277
6,000
4,393,254
1,260,555
47,240
276,294
1,584,089
472,770
20,672
212,962
47.026
753,450
3,629,651
143,349
553,577
6,000
4,332,577
1,165,873
47,240
271,294
1,484,407
472,339
22,494
214,217
25.472
734,522
3,615,300
118,089
504,977
(14,380)
4,223,986
1,182,273
33,452
249,153
1,464,878
431
(1,822)
(1,235)
21,554
18,928
14,351
25,260
48,600
20,380
108,591
(16,400)
13,788
22,141
19,529
93
CJ
11
Support Services:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Total Support Services
Total Police
TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY
PUBLIC WORKS:
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
699,603
699,603
696,507
3,096
61,230
53,706
32,877
20,829
100,350
100,234
86,923
13,311
861,183
853,543
816,307
37,236
7,570,253
7,423,977
7,239,593
184,284
10,914,558
10,665,538
10,414,5"
250,994
Public Works Administration:
Personal services
242,622
242,622
247,369
(4,747)
Supplies and materials
4,610
4,610
3,345
1,265
Other services and charges
93,086
93,086
86,598
6,488
Capital outlay
-
-
Total Public Works Administration
340,318
340,318
337,312
3,006
Streets:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Capital Outlay
Total Streets
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS
HEALTH AND SANITATION:
Residential Solidwaste:
Personal services
Supplies
Other services and charges
Capital Outlay
Total Residential Solidwaste
1,351,058
1,351,058
1,345,490
110,600
110,600
86,334
625,209
625,209
565,216
70,000
70,000
26,840
2,156,867
2,156,867
2,023,880
2,497,185
2,497,185
2,361,192
5,568
24,266
59,993
43,160
132,987
135,993
889,405
889,405
882,493
6,912
193,539
193,539
184,279
9,260
674,765
674,765
678,195
(3,430)
1,757,709
1,757,709
1,744,967
12,742
Commercial solidwaste:
Other services and charges 15,000 15,000 13,997 1,003
TOTAL HEALTH AND SANITATION 1,772,709 1,772,709 1,758,964 13,745
CULTURE & RECREATION:
Park Maintenance:
Personal services
923,357
923,357
891,822
31,535
Supplies and materials
69,600
71,125
77,905
(6,780)
Other services and charges
620,874
621,870
597,480
24,390
Capital outlay
23,500
21,975
6,320
15,655
Total Park Maintenance
1,637,331
1,638,327
1,573,527
64,800
M
1 a •
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted
Amounts
Actual
Positive
'
Original
Final
Amounts
(Negative)
Recreation:
Personal services
673,684
673,684
641,297
32,387
Supplies
43,573
44,200
34,103
10,097
Other services and charges
89,334
89,334
81,464
7,870
Capital Outlay
-
-
-
-
Total Recreation
806,591
807,218
756,864
50,354
Special Services:
Personal services
396,205
375,475
372,964
2,511
'
Supplies
29,200
26,600
17,345
9,255
Other services and charges
104,313
65,463
68,378
(2,915)
Total Special Services
529,718
467,538
458,687
8,851
'
Parks Administration:
Personal Services
407,117
407,117
387,415
19,702
'
Supplies
Other Services and Charges
13,350
64,777
12,981
64,777
8,824
59,827
4,157
4,950
Total Parks Administration
485,244
484,875
456,066
28,809
TOTAL CULTURE AND RECREATION
3,458,884
3,397,958
3,245,144
152,814
TOTAL GENERAL FUND
$ 24,460,156
$ 24,474,166
$ 23,386,406
$ 993,236
n
1 95
�m
11
1
[I
I
COMBINING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
IInternal Service Funds
' Internal Service Funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one City department for
another.
Motor Pool Fund — This fund is used to account for the cost of operating and maintaining automotive and other
equipment used by City departments and the purchase of general government vehicles (those not used by
proprietary fund activities). Service charges are billed to departments on a monthly basis to cover all expenses
of the fund.
' Technology Fund — This fund is used to account for the cost of operating and maintaining computer software
and equipment used by City departments. Service charges are billed to departments on a monthly basis to
1 cover all expenses of the fund.
Insurance Fund — This fund is used to account for the provision of group health coverage for all City employees
and others eligible under the City's plan, including employee dependents and retirees.
I
1
1
1
97
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Internal Service Funds
Combining Statement of Net Assets
September 30, 2004
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
Investments
Accrued interest receivable
Miscellaneous Receivable
Material and supplies inventories, at cost
Prepaid Expenses
Total current assets
Noncurrent assets:
Capital assets
Vehicles and equipment
Less accumulated depreciation
Total noncurrent assets
Total assets
LIABILITIES
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable
Accrued salaries payable
Total current liabilities
Noncurrent liabilities:
Accrued employee separation pay
Total noncurrent liabilities
Total liabilities
Motor
Pool Technology Insurance Totals
$ 1,514,550
$ 519.393
$ 1,171,273
$ 3,205,216
618,740
212,187
467,113
1,298,040
3,543
1,203
2,660
7,406
79,711
-
-
79,711
37,616
-
-
37,616
2,254,160
732,783
1,641,046
4,627,989
9,692,920
1,107,484
-
10,800,404
(5,430,888)
(886,308)
-
(6,317,196)
4,262,032
221,176
-
4,483,208
6,516,192
953,959
1,641,046
9,111,197
159,631
51,831
243,667
455,129
29,636
11,919
-
41,555
189,267
63,750
243,667
496,684
108,419
-
-
108,419
108,419
-
-
108,419
297,686
63,750
243,667
605,103
NET ASSETS
Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 4,262,032 221,176 - 4,483,208
Unrestricted (deficit) 1,956,473 669,033 1,397,379 4,022,885
Total net assets $ 6,218,505 $ 890,209 $ 1,397,379 $ 8,506,093
98
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
' Internal Service Funds
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Assets
September 30, 2004
I
Operating revenues:
User Fees
Operating expenses:
Personal services
Supplies
Other sevices and charges
'
Depreciation
Total operating expenses
'
Operating income (loss)
Nonoperating revenues (expenses):
Interest income
Gain (loss) on sale of equipment
Total nonoperating revenues (expenses)
Income before contributions and transfers
Transfers in
Transfers out
' Change in net assets
Net assets —beginning
Net assets —ending
1
1
Motor
Pool
Technology
Insurance
Totals
$ 1,900,447
$ 1,221,531
$ 2,404,735
$ 5,526,713
619,896
309,883
537,415
1,467,194
208,563
146,939.
-
355,502
158,197
536,771
3,901,703
4,596,671
965,588
98,844
-
1,064,432
1,952,244
1,092,437
4,439,118
7,483,799
(51,797)
129,094
(2,034,383)
(1,957,086)
23,074 .
7,029
20,838
50,941
(119,208)
4
-
(119,204)
(96,134)
7,033
20,838
(68,263)
(147,931)
136,127
(2,013,545)
(2,025,349)
1,034,797
1,034,797
(27,392)
(877)
-
(28,269)
(175,323)
135,250
(978,748)
(1,018,821)
6,393,826
754,959
2,376,126
9,524,911
$ 6,218,503 $ 890,209 $ 1,397,378 $ 8,506,090
' 99
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Internal Service Funds
Combining Statement of Cash Flows
September 30, 2004
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Cash received from user fees
Cash payments to suppliers
Cash payments for personal services
Net cash provided by operating activities
CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL
FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Operating transfers out to other funds
CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND
RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Payments for capital acquisitions
Proceeds from sale of assets . .
Net cash (used) by capital and
and related financing activies
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Interest on investments
Investments purchased
Investments sold
Net cash provided by investing activities
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
Balances -beginning of the year
Balances -end of the year
Reconciliation of operating income (loss) to
net cash provided (used) by operating activities:
Operating income (loss)
Adjustments to reconcile operating income to net cash
provided (used) by operating activities:
Depreciation expense
(Increase) decrease in inventories & prepaid expenses
Increase (decrease) in accrued salaries payable
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable
Increase (decrease) in accrued employee separation
Total adjustments
Net cash provided by operating activities
Motor
Pool Technology Insurance Totals
$1,820,736
$ 1,221,531 $ 2,404,735 $ 5,447,002
(208,974)
(619,352) (3,828,965) (4,657,291)
608,373
- - (608,373)
1,003,389
304,215 (1,961,646) (654,042)
877 - (877)
(932,821) (31,460) - (964,281)
81,131 - - 81,131
840,455 31,460 - (871,915)
22,073
6,413
21,436
49,922
-
(132,270)
(10,695)
(142,965)
266,105
-
-
(266,105)
244,032
125,857
10,741
(359,148)
(108,490)
146,021
(916,108)
(878,577)
1,614,322
370,382
2,080,798
4,065,502
$1,505,832
$ 516,403
$ 1,164,690
$ 3,186,925
$ 51,797 $ 129,094 $ 2,034,383 $(1,957,086)
965,588
98,844
- 1,064,432
6,594
57,975
- 64,569
7,999
-
- 7,999
151,192
6,383
72,738 230,313
3,524
-
- 3,524
1,134,897
163,202
72,738 1,370,837
$1,003,389 $ 304,215 $(1,961,645)
100
0 i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CAPITAL ASSETS USED IN THE OPERATION
OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
These schedules present the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. A capital asset is presented in
this schedule when it has been purchased using general governmental resources and is used for general
governmental purposes. Assets are recorded at historical cost if purchased, or if historical cost is not available,
estimated historical cost, or fair market value on the date donated, if donated.
101
0 0
102
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
is i
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds
Schedule by Source
September 30, 2004
Governmental funds capital assets
Land 7,681,339
Buildings 17,844,812
Equipment 1,149,586
Improvements 7,191,272
Infrastructure 23,390,330
Construction in progress 4,148,624
Total governmental funds capital assets $ 61,405,963 .
Investment in governmental funds capital assets by source
Current Operations $ 13,975,774
Capital Projects 44,430,673
Total governmental funds capital assets $ 58,406,447
This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds.
Accordingly, the capital assets reported in internal service funds are excluded from the
above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of internal service funds are included as
governmental activities in the statement of net assets.
103
0 0
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds
Schedule by Function and Activity
September 30, 2004
Function and Activity
Land
Buildings
Equipment
Improvements
General government
Administration
$ 858,364
$ 6,377,917
$ 292,578
$ 372,917
Finance
-
-
-
-
Planning
217,002
-
19,922
-
Total general government
1,075,366
6,377,917
312,500
372,917
Public safety
Fire
563,413
3,784,847
314,437
28,422
Police
43,844
1,032,387
278,972
-
Total public safety
607,257
4,817,234
593,409
28,422
Public works
Administration
2,760,405
2,032,362
92,676
74,823
Streets
-
-
-
-
Total public works
2,760,405
2,032,362
92,676
74,823
Cultural and Recreational
Parks and recreation
3,238,311
4,617,299
153,001
6,715,109
Total governmental funds
capital assets
$ 7,681,339
$ 17,844,812
$ 1,151,586
$ 7,191,271
This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds.
Accordingly, the capital assets reported in internal service funds are excluded from the
above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of internal service funds are included as
governmental activities in the statement of net assets.
104
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Construction
Infrastructure in Progress Total
$ -
$ 42,170
$ 7,943,946
190,488
300,056
727,468
190,488
342,226
8,671,414
-
295,648
4,986,767
-
35,734
1,390,937
-
331,382
6,3771704
6,599,658
3,192,507
14,752,431
16,515,353
-
16,515,353
23,115,011
3,192, 007
31,267,784
15, 089, 060
280,509
84,831
$ 23,390,330 $ 4,146,624 $ 61,405,962
105
•
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds
Schedule of Changes by Function and Activity
For the Year Ended September 30, 2004
Governmental
Governmental
Fund Capital
Fund Capital
Assets
Assets
October 1,
Additions/
Retirements/
September 30,
Function and Activity
2003
Adjustments
Adjustments
2004
General government
Administration
$ 7,301,096
$ 642,850
$ -
$ 7,943,946
Finance
14,583
-
(14,583)
-
Planning
539,495
187,973
-
727,468
Total general government
7,855,174
830,823
(14,583)
8,671,414
Public safety
Fire
5,188,618
77,790
(279,640)
4,986,768
Police
1,335,166
55,771
-
1,390,937
Total public safety
6,523,784
133,561
(279,640)
6,377,705
Public works
Administration
12,566,348
2,186,083
-
14,752,431
Streets
16,515,353
-
-
16,515,353
Total public works
29,081,701
2,186,083
-
31,267,784
Cultural and Recreational
Parks and recreation
14,945,786
156,615
(13,340)
15,089,061
Total governmental funds
capital assets
$ 58,406,445 $ 3,307,082 $ (307,563) $ 61,405,964
This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds.
Accordingly, the capital assets reported in internal service funds are excluded from the
above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of internal service funds are included as
governmental activities in the statement of net assets.
M2
1
1
1
STATISTICAL SECTION
1
107
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Government -wide Expenses by Function
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
Fiscal
General
Public
Public
Health &
Year
Government
Safety
Works
Sanitation
2003
$ 8,625,554
$ 10,771,423
$ 3,638,063
$ 1,823,462
2004
10,428,287
11,648,075
1,267,829
1,906,519
Interest on
Culture &
Long Term
Recreation
Debt
$ 4,048,974
$ 747,351
4,106,491
689,644
Note: City of La Porte first applied GASB Statement No. 34 in fiscal year 2003; therefore,
government -wide financial information for years prior to fiscal year 2003 is not available.
City of La Porte, Texas
Govemment-wide Revenues
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
PROGRAM REVENUES
GENERAL REVENUES
Operating
Fiscal
Charges for
Grants and
Investment
Loss on Sale
Year
Services
Contributions
Taxes Earnings Miscellaneous
of Assets
2003
$ 13,106,260
$ 480,037
$ 22,865,250 $ 663,428 $ 1,594,184
$ (260,545)
2004
11,581,258
576,262
22,939,985 464,961 1,410,045
- 124,988
Note: City of La Porte first applied GASB Statement No. 34 in fiscal year 2003; therefore,
government -wide financial information for years prior to fiscal year 2003 is not available.
108
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Water
Sewer
Golf
Convention
Services
Services
Airport Course
Center
$ 6,339,238
$ 1,913,284
$ 149,472 $ 1,284,729
$ 212,947
6,686,457
1,895,709
142,765 1,222,819
194,314
Total
$ 38,448,814
36,847,523
109
Total
$ 39,554,497
•
City of La Porte, Texas
General Governmental Expenditures by Function'
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
Fiscal
General
Public
Public
Health and
Parks and
Year
Government
Safety
Works
Sanitation
Recreation
1995
$ 5,852,031
$ 5,915,849
$ 1,979,267
$ 1,622,361
$ 2,005,982
1996
4,472,650
6,355,939
1,985,548
1,815,140
2,093,166
1997
4,495,678
6,889,530
2,070,686
1,873,746
2,331,312
1998
4,537,921
7,472,289
2,144,846
2,225,835
2,560,069
1999
5,056,127
7,842,420
2,204,287
2,413,218
2,697,886
2000
5,030,071
8,644,309
2,304,829
2,411,767
2,944,296
2001
5,232,112
9,364,320
2,487,825
2,278,761
3,058,199
'2002
5,295,157
10,165,683
2,422,522
1,764,906
3,297,865
2003
5,625,003
10,477,080
2,556,011
1,823,462
3,475,888
2004
7,971,284
10,414,544
2,361,192
1,758,964
3,245,144
' This table includes General, Special Revenue and Debt Service Funds.
110
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
$ 2,525,842
2,424,211
2,212,278
2,061,420
2,054,379
2,145, 841
2,504,933
2,319,535
2,385,199
2,189,834
Total
$ 19,901,332
19,146,654
19,873,230
21,002,380
22,268,317
23,481,113
24,926,150
25,265,668
26,342,643
27,940,962
111
City of La Porte, Texas
General Governmental Revenues by Source'
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
Fiscal
Licenses
Fines and
Charges for
Inter -
Year
Taxes 2
and Permits
Forfeits
Services
governmental
1995
$ 15,843,519
$ 169,962
$ 271,308
$ 2,346,812
$ 154,339
1996
16,181,649
218,946
353,837
2,439,161
142,600
1997
17,148,601
243,632
427,305
2,567,400
187,333
1998
18,841,950
303,890
617,432
2,552,849
192,821
1999
19,400,416
357,694
479,363
2,996,774
170,044
2000
20,231,824
337,259
407,459
3,147,031
313,261
2001
21,685,552
262,010
561,547
2,923,504
673,105
2002
22,535,013
238,535
614,534
2,108,739
385,722
2003
22,921,623
199,970
847,250
2,275,333
302,912
2004
21,950,808
320,405
554,559
304,285
576,262
' This table includes General, Special Revenue and Debt Service Funds.
2 Includes ad valorem, franchise, sales, industrial payments, and other taxes.
112
•
'
Interest
Miscellaneous
Total
$ 509,292
$ 100,183
$ 19,395,415
589,499
85,202
20,010,894
'
589,971
28,470
21,192,712
694,129
14,791
23,217,862
627,387
88,508.
24,120,186
836,115
71,417
25,344,366
926,656
112,389
27,144,763
444,248
143,668
26,470,459
295,069
88,970
26,931,127
'
291,300
32,605
24,030,224
1
113
Pi
City of La Porte, Texas
Property Tax Levies and Collections
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
Delinquent
Fiscal
Total
Current Tax
Percent of
Tax
Total Tax
Year
Tax Levy
Collections
Levy Collected
Collections
Collections'
1995
$ 7,688,390
$ 7,475,963
97.24%
$ 96,555
$ 7,572,516
1996
7,874,567
7,693,553
97.70%
152,106
7,845,659
1997
8,310,963
8,100,624
97.47%
358,575
8,459,199
1998
8,598,632
8,437,322
98.12%
220,553
8,657,875
1999
8,939,428
8,795,498
98.39%
206,154
9,001,652
2000
9,175,689
9,006,072
98.15%
184,584
9,190,656
2001
10,102,074
9,831,981
97.33%
247,977
10,079,958
2002
10,683,102
10,515,098
98.43%
207,508
10,722,606
2003
10,740,051
10,539,796
98.14%
300,131
10,839,927
2004
11,078,891
10,924,697
98.61%
263,540
11,188,237
' Excludes penalties and interest.
114
Percentage
Percent of
of Total Tax
Outstanding
Delinquent
Collections
Delinquent
Taxes to
to Tax Levy
Taxes
Tax Levy
98.49%
1,162,317
15.12%
99.63%
1,101,197
'13.98%
101.78%
1,108,770
13.34%
100.69%
1,036,304
12.05%
100.70%
901,832
10.09%
100.16%
830,979
9.06%
99.78%
619,890
6.14%
100.37%
864,736
8.09%
100.93%
854,559
7.96%
100.99%
808,145
7.29%
1
1
1
1
115
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Property Tax Rates - Direct and Overlapping Govemments
(Per $100 of Assessed Value)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
City of La Porte
Hams County
Port of
Fiscal
General
Debt Service
Flood Control
Harris
Houston
Year
Fund
Fund
Total
District 2
County2
Authority z
1995
0.55
0.16
0.71
0.0760
0.4068
0.0129
1996
0.55
0.16
0.71
0.0760
0.4070
0.0130
1997
0.57
0.14
0.71
0.0742
0.4276
0.0160
1998
0.57
0.14
0.71
0.0800
0.4166
0.0213
1999
0.57
-0.14
0.71
0.0800
0.3948
0.0204
2000
0.57
0.14
0.71
0.0617
0.3590
0.0183
2001
0.57
0.14
0.71
0.0476
0.3839
0.0183
2002
0.57
0.14
0.71
0.0476
0.3839
0.0183
2003
0.58
0.14
0.71
0.04174
0.3881
0.0199
2004
0.61
0.10
0.71
0.03318
0.3999
0.0167
Source: 1 City of La Porte records
2 Office of Hams County
3 Office of La Porte Independence School District
4 Office of San Jacinto Jr. College District
116
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Harris County
San Jacinto
Board of
Hospital
La Porte
Jr. College
Education 2
District 2
I.S.D. 3
District 4
Total
0.0052
0.1835
1.560
0.1000
3.0544
0.0050
0.1240
1.560
0.1100
3.0050
0.0056
0.1238
1.560
0.1100
3.0272
0.0061
0.1238
1.610
0.1100
3.0778
0.0063
0.1465
1.610
0.1100
3.1180
0.0063
0.2027
1.650
0.1260
3.1340
0.0063
0.1902
1.630
0.1307
3.1170
0.0063
0.1902
1.630
0.1307
3.1170
0.0063
0.1902
1.680
0.1307
3.1670
0.0063
0.1902
1.734
0.1391
3.2289
117
•
118
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Ratio of Gross General Bonded Debt to Assessed Value
and Gross Bonded Debt Per Capita
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
Gross
Taxable
Bonded
Fiscal
Value
Debt'
Year
Population
(in thousands)
(in thousands)
1995
30,464
$ 1,076,592
$ 13,555
1996
31,045
1,135,711
11,835
1997
31,859
1,191,363
10,255
1998
32,658
1,231,486
11,170
1999
34,191
1,277,210
9,675
2000
31,880
1,525,166
11,370
2001
32,356
1,422,739
9,745
2002
32,910
1,504,631
13,610
2003
33,789
1,512,665
12,170
2004
33,712
1,560,406
10,830
Ratio of
Gross Bonded
Gross
Debt to
Bonded Debt
Taxable Value
Per Capita
1.26%
$ 445
1.04%
381
0.86%
321
0.91 %
342
0.76%
283
0.75%
324
0.68%
311
0.90%
425
0.80%
360
0.69%
320
' Included long-term general obligation debt but not liability for employees separation pay.
119
City of La Porte, Texas
Computation of Direct and Overlapping Debt
September 30, 2004
(Unaudited)
La Porte Independent School District
Harris County Flood Control District
Harris County (includes toll roads
and bridges)
Port of Houston Authority
San Jacinto Jr. College District
Total Overlapping Debt
City of La Porte
Total Direct and Overlapping Debt
Total Direct and Overlapping Debt Per Capita
1
Percentage
Amount
Net Debt
Applicable to
Applicable to
Outstanding
City of La Porte
Cityof LaPorte
$ 76,950,000
35.71 %
$ 27,478,845'
91,774,985
0.88%
807,620
11,888,198 1
1,350,931,590
0.88%
324,595,000
0.88%
2,856,4361
59,495,000
5.97%
3,551,852
46,582,950,
1,903,746,575
14,720,000
100.00%
12,922,787
$ 1,918,466,575
$ 59-505-737
1,761 1
Source: Moroney, Beissner & Co., Inc., Financial Advisors
120
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Ratio of Annual Debt Service Expenditures for
General Obligation Debt to Total General Expenditures
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
Fiscal
Year Principal Interest
1995
$ 1,715,000
$ 810,842
1996
1,720,000
704,211
1997
1,610,000
602,278
1998
1,555,000
506,420
1999
1,495,000
559,379
2000
1,555,000
590,841
2001
1,775,000
729,932
2002
1,685,000
634,535
2003
1,590,000
795,199
2004
1,490,000
699,834
Ratio of Debt
Total
Service to
Total
General
Total General
Debt Service
Expenditures
Expenditures
$ 2,525,842
$ 19,901,332
12.69%
2,424,211
19,146,634
12.66%
2,212,278
19,873,230
11.13%
2,061,420
21,002,380
9.82%
2,054,379
22,089,712
9.30%
2,145,841
23,481,113
9.14%
2,504,932
24,926,150
10.05%
2,319,535
25,119,686
9.23%
2,385,199
26,130,052
9.13%
2,189,834
25,576,240
8.56%
' Includes all General Fund and Debt Service Fund Expenditures.
121
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Coverage
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
Net Revenue
Fiscal
Operating
Operating
Available for
Year
Revenue'
Expenses 2
Debt Service
1995
$ 6,000,898
$ 3,802,082
$ 2,198,816
1996
6,260,721
3,908,378
2,352,343
1997
6,106,337
4,081,712
2,024,625
1998
6,368,938
4,177,982
2,190,956
1999
6,445,231
4,386,479
2,058,752
2000
6,844,236
5,626,662
1,217,574
2001
6,094,735
4,347,508
1,747,227
2002
5,988,595
4,814,158
1,174,437
2003
5,837,448
5,025,158
812,290
2004
5,836,221
5,125,635
710,586
' Includes interest income.
2 Excludes depreciation and loss on uncollectible accounts.
122
1
r
Debt Service Requirements
Interest
Total
Coverage
Principal
$ 485,000
$ 324,061 $
809,061
2.72
'
570,000
290,100
860,100
2.73
540,000
256,603
796,603
2.54
535,000
263,547
798,547
2.74
660,000
211,328
871,328
2.36
660,000
170,483
830,483
1.47
660,000
168,781
828,781
2.11
'
625,000
132,418
757,418
1.55
580,000
115,948
695,948
1.17
580,000
71,293
651,293
1.09
I=
1
1
1
1 123
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Assessed and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property'
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaudited)
Real Property Personal Property
Year
Actual Value
1995
$ 930,863,730
1996
1,088,617,760
1997
1,107,091,700
1998
1,132,150,100
1999
1,200,942,090
2000
1,348,881,240
2001
1,346,611,820
2002
1,461,368,400
2003
1,498,049,850
2004
1,546,560,410
Taxable Value
Actual Value
Taxable Value
$ 905,935,390
$ 199,850,740
$ 170,656,790
963,946,080
197,177,710
171,765,840
991,682,852
222,428,561
199,680,490
1,030,030,350
239,361,192
201,455,980
1,073,849,843
231,352,908
203,361,040
1,288,197,300
258,255,710
236,968,760
1,128,777,060
295,183,470
293,962,150
1,212,042,880
295,213,550
292,588,100
1,246,480,840
270,257,240
266,183,680
1,288,266,880
279,687,470
272,140,030
Source: City of La Porte records, local financial and the Harris County Appraisal District
' Properly values shown are appraised values, which represent estimated actual value.
Ratio of total appraised value to estimated actual value for all years is 100%.
124
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Exemptions
Real Property
Personal Property
Actual Value
$ 141,138,650
$ 450,650
$ 1,130,714,470
145,406,130
419,590
1,285,795,470
146,950,580
522,210
1,329,520,261
151,108,330
129,520
1,371,511,292
169,445,710
809,240
1,432,294,998
186,962,500
956,290
1,607,136,950
217,834,760
1,221,320
1,641,795,290
249,325,520
2,625,450
1,756,581,950
251,569,010
4,073,560
1,768,307,090
258,293,530
7,547,440
1,826,247,880
125
Total
Ratio of
Actual Value to
Taxable Value
Taxable Value
$ 1,076,592,180
105.03%
1,135,711,920
113.21 %
1,191,363,342
111.60%
1,231,486,330
111.37%
1,277,210,883
112.14%
1,525,166,060
105.37%
1,422,739,210
115.40%
1,504,630,980
116.75%
1,512,664,520
116.90%
1,560,406,910
117.04%
•
0
1
City of La Porte, Texas
Principal Taxpayers
1
September 30, 2004
(Unaudited)
1
Percentage
2003
of Total
Assessed
Assessed
1
Taxpayer
Type of Business
Valuation
Valuation
1
Oxy Vinyls LP
Plant
Chemical$
49, 186,150
2.78%
Conoco Phillips Inc
Chemical Plant
48,612,640
2.75%
Equistar Chemicals LP
Chemical Plant
45,125,300
2.55%
1
BP Solvay
Chemical Plant
38,054,910
2.15%
Centerpoint Energy
utility
23,824,970
1.35%
PPG Industries
Chemical Plant
23,585,660
1.33%
1
Attofina Petrochemicals
Chemical Plant
22,293,400
1.26%
Dow Chemicals
Chemical Plant
20,710,190
1.17%
Dupont Dow Elastomers
Chemical Plant
17,664,140
1.00%
1
PPG Industries
Chemical Plant
13,445,270
0.76%
$
302,502,630
17.11 %
Source: City of La Porte Tax records.
1
r
.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
126
n
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Fiscal
Year
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
PODUlation (1
30,464
31,045
31,859
32,658
34,191
31,880
32,356
32,910
33,789
33,712
City of La Porte, Texas
Demographic Statistics
September 30, 2004
(Unaudited)
School
Enrollment (2
7,427
7,458
7,353
7,415
7,477
7,645
7,772
7,732
7,648
7,629
Unemployment
Rate (3)
6.1 %
4.0%
5.3%
4.3%
4.4%
3.9%
4.6%
5.6%
7.0%
6.0%
Sources: (1) Based on building permits issued by the City's Inspection Division and
information obtained from the U. S. Census Bureau.
(2) La Porte Independent School District for the school year ending August 31.
(3) Texas Workforce Commission rates for Harris County, as of September 2004
127
City of La Porte, Texas
Property Value, Construction and Bank Deposits
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(Unaud►ted)
Commercial
Residential
Construction
Construction
Fiscal
Number
Number
Year
of Units
Value
of Units
Value
1995
25
$ 6,024,751
152
$ 12,889,457
1996
21
6,443,359
181
15,166,761
1997
52
9,189,192
199
17,910,021
1998
24
10,682,637
258
32,216,337
1999
46
20,944,265
282
33,741,959
2000
25
8,255,364
290
17,891,727
2001
31
9,679,778
155
20,037,910
2002
31
7,149,145
146
21,222,481
2003
21
4,077,913
164
21,337,646
2004
22
6,270,391
112
12,917,657
Bank Deposits
Number
Property
of Units
Amount
Value'
3
$ 185,050,239
1,076,592,180
2
176,891,604
1,135,711,920
3
220,345,717
1,191,363,342
3
293,810,442
1,231,486,330
2
275,951,399
1,277,210,883
2
304,034,393
1,525,166,060
2
328,478,701
1,422,739,210
2
325,832,577
1,504,630,980
1
280,362,658
1,512,664,520
1,560,406,910
Source: City of La Porte records, local financial institutions and the Harris County Appraisal District.
' Property values shown are appraised values, which represent taxable value.
Ratio of total appraised value to estimated actual value for all years is 100%.
State law requires the Appraisal District to report current values.
MI —I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Date of Incorporation
Form of Government
Area
Miles of Streets
Number of Street Lights
Fire Protection:
Number of stations
Number of paid personnel
Number of volunteer firefighters
Police Protection:
Number of stations
Number of police officers
Number of reserve officers
Municipal Water Department:
Number of meters
Average daily consumption
Miles of water mains
Sewers:
Sanitary sewers
Storm sewers
Recreation and Culture
Number of parks
Acreage
Employees:
Full-time
Part-time
Education:
Attendance centers
Number of teachers
Number of students
City of La Porte, Texas
Miscellaneous Statistical Data
September 30, 2004
(Unaudited)
129
August 10, 1892
Council/Manager
19 Square miles
164
1,665
13
90
1
72
5
10,987 Meters
3.2 Million gallons
231 Miles
187 Miles
89 Miles
19
463
352
45
11
483
7,629
0 0
130
•
4.
U
0
A/1.
Recommendation to Audit Committee
OFFORECLOS
ACTIVITY. .
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
023-206-084-0026
Property Struck off for:
CAUSE NO:
1991-31131
PLAINTIFF(S):
City of La Porte & La Porte. Independent School District
JUDGMENT AGAINST:
Scott, Claudell E.-& Heirs ..
JUDGMENT DATE:
December 16, 1992
STRUCK OFF DATE:.
December 2, 1997
ORDER OF SALE:
November 11, 1997
DEED RECORDED DATE:
January 21;. 1998. .
STRUCK OFF TO:
City of La Porte
CONSTABLE:.
Bill Bailey, Constable Precint'No 8
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
300 Block of North Broadway
.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:.
Lots 26-32 Block 84 La Porte
ADJUDGED VALUE (IN JUDGMENT):
$54,940.00
SQUARE FOOTAGE:.
21,875.
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
BIDDER: Dennis McClung/Bruce
Meismer
BIDDER'S ADDRESS:
631 Baywood
AMOUNT OF BID:.
$21,000.00 :
Shoreacres, TX 77571
AMOUNT"OF DEPOSIT:..
$2,100.00
AMOUNT DUE:
$18,900.00 .'
BIDDER'S PHONE NO:
281-867-1338
PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO'EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT
-
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
AL.
%
SCHOOL.
%
CITY
%
TOTAL
AMOUNT DUE
$11,297.85
41.31%
$9,967.00
36.45%
$6,082.26
22.24%
- $27,347.11.
ASSOCIATED COSTS ON ORIGINAL AND SEALED BID SALES
CONSTABLE/
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF
COURT'
PUBLICATION FEE
AD LITEM
RESEARCH FEE &
TO BE PRORATED T
BID '
COST
(TISD).
FEE
DEED RECORDING FEE
TAXES
$21,000.00
' $665.00
$4,130.80
Ad.00
. $250.00
$15,954.20 .
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION
OWED TO
COUNTY
'/o .. ' .
SCHOOL
%
CITY
%
TOTAL
PRORATED ..
AMOUNT
$6,591.12'
41.31%
$5,814.7I
36.45%
$3,548.37 22.24% $15,954.20
Amount of Bid:
:
$21,060.00
Costs:
-District Clerk..
.. $615.00.:
-Tax Master
$50.00 :..
:.
-Liens
$3,955.80 .
-Publication:..
:... $175.00
..' . .
-Abstract Fee
$.250.00
.
-Cost
$0.00..::.
-Ad Litem Fee .
$0.00
Total: - : $15,954.20
-
Taxing
Jurisdictions:
Amount in Judgment:.
%
Amount Received
City of La Porte;
$6,082.26
22.24%
$3,548.37 . .
La Porte ISD
'$9,967.00 `' ...
36.45%
$5,814.71.
Harris County
$11;297:85 . ' :
41.31%
$6,591.12
San Jacinto CCD
$0.00 ' .
0.00%
$0.00
State of Texas.
$0.00
0.00%
$0.00 .'
$27,347.11
100.00%
$15,954.20
Costs + Taxes
$32,892.91
Adjudged Value
$ 54,940.00
P006
STATE CLASS CODE: X1 - Governmental Exempt
OWNER INFORMATION _
LOCATION INFORMATION.
Owner Name: CITY OF L'APORTE
Property Address: 317 BROADWAY
Owner Address: CAUSE #91-31131
LA PORTS TX : 77571
PO BOK1115
Legal Description : LTS 26 THRU 32 BLK 04;
LA PORTE TX 77572-1115 .'
LA PORTE ' . '
EXEMPTIONS INFORMATION
JURISDICTION INFORMATION ;
Homestead Exemption : E -Total Exemption ::
Code Jurisdiction/Taxing Unit 2000 : 2001=
Special Exemption : '—.Rate
Disabled Veteran Exemption(s)
020 LA PORTE..ISD 1.63000 1.63000 .:
040 HARRIS COUNTY + RELATED. ENTITIES 0.64802 0.64627
_
047 SAN JACINTO JR COLLEGE DISTRICT 0.12600-0.13071 .
:
071 ' LA PORTE.. CITY OF 0.71000'0.71000
VALUE STATUS INFORMATION
Notice Date: 4/26/2001 . : , Value Status:: All Values Certified
Capped Account: No : ARB Approved : 8/10/2001
VALUATION INFORMATION
'
Valuation.. 2000 Appraised.. Change' . ' 2001'Appraised '- 2001 Market Value
Land: - $20,900 ' $0 $20,900
Improvement: $45,670 : $0 : $45,670
A9/Tmbr/Spc : $0 .0 $0
Total Value: $66,570 $0 $66,570
$66,570
RESIDENTIAL IMPROVED DATA:
.
•Parcel ID-: 20 - 00921.3 - 07.0 - 004.6 - 0 / 000 - 004 7 .
`Card ••' • • � `- • . ..
Land Use.: 101 —Residential 1:Family . ..
_
Land Area : 0 sq. ft:
CAMA Class: R11 —Residential Improved
Map Facet: 6254D
Total Living Units: 1
'Key Map
Year.Built : 1940..
Neighborhood : 2164
_ Style: Bungalow
: Exterior Wall.: Frame or Concrete Block
Stories: 7
Foundation: Crawl Space• '=;•
Living Area* : 360 sq, ft. :.
Heating / Air : None -
Bed. /Bath : 2 11 full, 0 half.
Attic : None
Rec /Total Rooms..: 0 / 4
' " Physical Condition .:.Poor •= .
: Wood Fireplace : 0
Grade:
Metal Fireplace: 0 . :
:. Status: Dwelling
Other: Carport .
* The Living Area for residential properties is calculated by=measuring the outside:perimeter of the structure and includes -only
finished, habitable residential space. Lower level living area and finished attic space are included in the living area calculation,
but unfinished attic space and attached or detached building features such. -as open porches, garages, 'and other. minor buildings
are calculated separately.
8--«
n9-0009 _n
«
. ----
ti----
«10 '"--- - - --
--
22_ L3
�
--a-
12
21 'n� „
12. 1O
ixs
«11 ---�A�...21
«21-0042_20_0-320._N_
_
„13_Ott:«2---
■-
--
2_i_-0013._^
«Z2- ---
20----'"
1_40_
19._0_ „l$
,4
„ 1Hams-
2 1xs . «
«,3�«
RJ
19
---
18 „7R°14
o _
-�
«
-----
19 -c--«
--^-
18 ---
17 us «
t5 ---
l6 ,n
17 ,n «
18 In«1-18
COuny
916 1n
161
17
+
,ifi «
�.1 «
Appraisal
NORTH E STREET-
1. 32_,_- 2--•--.4 31----.-« 2_- -„ ■ ■
«32125 -« -Z---_.« 31.:---« �-=--- 30----- 30.
h 3 « •.30 QOZB _ � 4 600 112-- 6« 29 0025 _'�6 4:Qn01_ �01 _it
5 -- « Z8 � - - 5 - - Q
E-W20
•0027 - „ « 5 « 2_----«zs 627
«6----- - T__zs----APPtxs..« r6 1�-« «27 6_« 7 uuy _« �----.« 7__4,9y_A 26,:--- e ----« 8--�V
�---� _•_« 8 ,n 25 1n 8 ., 25 1xfi 9_ « 24
280034 « ..7_----- -" „ 24 __ �___ 10. G '�
25 ,n g. 24 0024 E . 6 _ : - w 10 « Z3 « Z.. -
$Q7_ _ „ «.8 « «24 _ _ 10' A 23 _ « . W Lo ' - „ 23 _ - - 11_
.. _ _
23�1038•+ '-• h1� '�' a+22---""_^ 12 21_4Q17_« .� 1$ n d
22,p037. « 515 • « 13-'!r l9' _ .o « .. 6 14 _ _
33 12 ?1�017-„ 't3_« ----- 14 _ -''�
JU
1 „ __ - . d 19___ __ - n F 1_5 _ _�
„ 3 «20 14 _ _ n 19 3 14 Qm. - - « tg_ - o- - * TEXAS
«t9 « 1$'•' . -- O 15na. 1B'
l9 {�32 . «14 �013- _ - -'- - . , m� 16' 12 « 7.
«15 1:s` « _ 16 17 , x'
n
7.
17, n16 , „' F a EAST MADI�ON STREET
:....
STREET'' ----- --- --
•: ..; ale 1" = 20
1 SON �x « 32 �_ _ _ - - - 32 2- - - - PUBLICATION DATE:*
15 --Ix
_ «, 91,-003 3 '• Ju,� D1,1seB
fi fi
is._--- 32_ __4_„
321x_ «.. 1-----q' 31.. « 2_�001_� 31 _ _« 3_0002'_^ -- 3_ --- 30_-0027_11 ,
30 - - - - g m- - r 30_0078 -'� 4 - - « 28 _ _« 4 ,n n 29 +n' . 5 _ _ « 28 - - - - 13 5 «
« «
« 4 - - « 5
_ 28 _p032_ N.
2890Z3: 5----- Zg-002Z- 81
-0Qo§_n _2?318' _ 7-•-n 26.1n « 7--- 25 3- 8--- -
29 _ _« 6 0005-. - r 28 « 7 : Q09Z : « 26 g '.. .. « . 25 _ _ _ « 6 - - - - - : rr 9-
9 /is n _ -0033 - « - 23'
9 000@
1 - _« - __. 23 1xs « 10._o_ 2-0021 W.. E.
9_ n 24�-- « za �+. 'E 10 ,xs.'. « 11 2_
1123 , « t0-0o09, _. x 23 ,xs « t l ,n 22. 9 « w I Z 4t8_ = - 12 _cq 21 . ,:s
11 « 22a�__ „' a �---=-- „ 2�0190031« 1__
•22. _0 -- 12 2l _ ----
12 .,n « 2 l in • « 0012 « 20^ „ .. V� 13 :0011 .' « 20 9016 '__ 14 a r
«a14W--� « 20.47 « 13..-- 14 �2 ..19.• _--� 14 « 15 0 _ S
0�19 =-16.-- -« 15'_a«
«20 . « 19 .1ifi « �. d 15 ,n ...«
19 1n 14,__ « Z'. 15 ----1: IB _� « - «. 16 7
180IBy7^ Q28_•_ !617 «'
'F•• ...
STREET
" EAST 'TYLER _
,xb.: .�32�n::�: 1. �•FACET��
TYLER . STREET , . :z ,n « 32 in _ - - - - - - «2
Z_ 1_^ 31�029__ 2-'--
32_._:._�... --_ - 3-435--- -.---- 625'4D
i, 331.: g 2_--=-« 31.- -� �. « 90_ _ 3--=--� 30-:-.-- 4_ 291n 4
30 « 30 29 _... 29125 5 _ _ _ N 28= - - - - 5
3 N�
4---� 1+ 5--=--« 6 a 1
_-� W ----« 27_'•'27_
25
_« 26 .ix B - -I=s « 26 N 8 -BOOS - - - 2 - 2 - -
26 „ - „ 0021 9__, �23--'n. 0
25 8 . us « 2 x 9 - « 24 m' 23 ,n - -
=-'� F 8 4oln! _ 24. 29 _ 1n.:-� az ,
Nunn
///uun
no®®
01
•
U
A/20
�MMARY.OF •
FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY.,'
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
100=523-000-0006-:.... ;
CAUSE NO:
1998-58659-
PLAINTIFF(S):: ' .
City of La Porte & La Porte Independent School District
JUDGMENT AGAINST:..
Connie S. William Karpiak
JUDGMENT DATE:
October.27, 1;999 '-.STRUCK- OFF DATE:'':..
March 7, 2000 -
ORDER.OF SALE:.
January 6, 2000, :..
DEED RECORDED DATE:
March 21; 2000.: STRUCK OFF TO: . ' .
City of La Porte -
CONSTABLE:
Bill Bailey,. Constable Precint.No 8.
• : PROPERTY ADDRESS:_
8423 Avington Rd '
.LEGAL DESCRIPTION.: :
Lot 6 Block 6 Brookglen Sec 1 R/P
ADJUDGED VALUE (IN JUDGMENT):
$56,000.00-
:
SQUARE FOOTAGE:.
. • 7,035
_' SUMMARY.OF SALE -ACTIVITY
.' . BIDDER: Tyrone D. Jones .. BIDDER'S ADDRESS.
6338 N FM 565
: AMOUNT OF BID:::..
$11,400.00...
Baytown;.TX 77.520
- AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT:
$1,140.00
:. :AMOUNT DUE:
.$10,260.00. BIDDER'S PHONE NO:
281-630-7301
PRORATED PERCENTAGED.OF TAXES'DU5TO EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT
..
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
AL.
..
%.
SCHOOL
...
. % � -
CITY '
%
.. •.
TOTAL
AMOUNT DUE
$9,648.19
�26.80%
� $16;611'13
.46.14%
:$9,744,83
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT'OF
COURT .�
CO.NSTABL"E/PUBLICATI
AD LITEM
: ,RESEARCH FEE
TO BE PRORATED TO
• BID
COST
ON FEE TIED '
FEE .
DEED RECORDING FEE
= TAXES •
$11,400.00
- $784.00
' $175.00
$0.00
•$250.00 .
$10,191.00
. : . ' • .PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION
OWED TO
COUNTY
%
CITY �•
%
TOTAL
PRORATED
AMOUNT
'.$2,730.93
26.80%.
-
$4,701.79
46.14%
' '
$2,758.28
27.07%
310,191.00
Amount of. Bid:.' � � .
�
• � .' $1,1,400.00;
.Costs: .' � :. .
� � - . �..
� � � .. - � • � -
. • . '-District'Clerk.
$734.00
-Tax Master
� •� . � � :: $50.00
Chris Stacy
� . • � ::. .. " . , .: � . � ... •.
-Constable Fee
• $0.00
. � .. _. • .
_
- ... � � � .
.:Publication:
� • $175.00'
. ',
• ��� � -Abstract Fee
: � � • : $250.00
.:. _
� � .� � .. ... . � •
-Cost .. .;
.�- .. $0:00 ,
. .. ..::- . •
.. •. � ..- .. - .
. -Ad� Litem Fe
. $0.00
Total:.$10,191.00
:.Taxing: _ � :-
.... •.��� � � �'�
•
.: ..
:.-
. Jurisdictions:
�
Amount in Judgment:
�'� % ��
Amount Received:.." - •
.. City of. La .Porte _, ;
$9,744.83 ..
27.07%
$2,758.28
La Porte ISD
$16,611.13
.46.14%:
$4,701.79 •.' • � .�. ... • . -
• Harris County
$8;341.12
so
.21266 77.79 66 eo eo eo 66 5 4 . 3 2 1 g n -0040 /. F a . • ' .12288 ' 1401 tangy ...
t bm .. 0 9. 8 7. 6 g g g 2al.x eS saes rax ma°
`� 3$ g o'^g = g m . 39 / 8 lxiss a.x 1 6 5 7ps ■ . .
eog g -^ �^ �� a •� ; zN Harms
P' .ul
= .
^ 10 eaSH Count .
COLLINGDALE. ROAD as
7aa� 8^a" /�?/ d''�
eas eas eas o f / U0/0.
,a b��aee eas u5 eas. 5 4 3 ::----- 0 LINCDALE ROAD:.: CO`, ■
9 8 : 7 8 ao7g ?mNg 1 g3T 31 A leas: $ 5a se. sx5aoe ee ee. Appr-a Sa
�,, g om^ c 8 0 8
4`il(34 ^ ° ry 6. ' 5 • 4 3 : 2 ■ ■"
.a6 ea6 !a 615 eae. 7nex D.i str 1 ct.
71.e9 ea5 ea6 - 3 � ON � 1
5 14 .g W• 18 �,.• ,eo td nm mtl a n `nY
Oo15 z IO 1 12 t . 8 Wm 7e es a.az
g m5 g 35 3� g 12 ' 3�1 o ee q +e M a° ° I as a7 al.oa 1� �a
a 00'6 3 ,sow z 8 9 : 910 0 i1 1. y2 2. 7a" APpp l8-0Ol6 zo st�,eeGas^
�',�a0t4.7 1$8 •o ';FQ.so .. eae 2 g _,Bm� 'g .�Os eNg,eae' g e.ao�us 7�� ,• .g 2e7a�s .g .•.m^ut�1mN� 14 3300. ,37
e490 13 I e1�ai3�4S s
'BEECROAD 160 v21 Nat at. 7ae 14I.' yQ
' 26 -28' 03 CHA2223 24 $VENROAD 20 . 21 170 0 �.b
'
�® a 19�img g `u1Q^ mR mi p°4 ` 15 •� 1! 726�,
S ' S7 �g eax' :ea: e`1Y� 'eax eu eas 32g2p �..:: fix low
17. 19 19 zo 21 t
szH '• 77%4^ � eax .. ea: &1B ..:°le , 7,.Is a : .�3� w
eae eae eae. ; eae '• ese 17 ^•J �D
34 . U $' a 7t 5 n r TEXAS
9 38' 37 .: `. 38 ` g g • i�er g ulo ig o N . 31' ' . W 30 . • 1a2e seas a.se a en 7.65 . 67
r01 •'n u/mg omg ' aW_ .. iv. .'^.
g m o 211 � .' U . I ':- . ; . , atl . 5a/i ai Be Tale 79 ,•�� �.>e
g g m e � .�45 28 25 , sag
m n./�s g • 0 28 28 27 24:
e5.. e5 eae ele sae eae e. cal 20
Q��1�7 ..23 .
` � Fla
BANDRIDGE ROAD' "'e,, Tm�$' oN nm$._ m-sz Scale 0'
eu "a eae,.• .:eas
xe eas els 7naa !e1e 196 se s5 ' et22 aa��" 'PUBLICATION DATE:.
.. 85 . 88 87 88• • • g69 9 .ass 9 " March Ira, 2000 ..
59 ' 60'. - 6l ' • 62 63 ' 64 _ o_m 13 mmg -0069
O 19 eoN$ ' 1VP1 g �. 170 s ..
rg mg • 72
mmg Cos -Nmse8 lnuig'. ''a" '�- .' : o5.a1 . BROOKGN R.P ,see �1 nua -
V^ _ & m as GAS GAS °id^ sx"eT as ^ �" �aa W oe. �028 o T - 100-518 3�2%� �.0, ..
,ae Ones • 87, e7 e7 a7 y OU I ^ e n0
4� 8 2.. 1 I : N..
U� 23
: • n mg g 0,1p: g . 1 np°g note g g - ' 87 32 7 . I RES .L OZ
`a4` 'mY ^ ''m - m' ^ .. 6 . W7 �: ' . m „o . '$ .14
e7 °7 Ise/ 170 g 100.525-000.0070 , . H
3302 67 e7 . e7 e7 .. ..
S ..0011. �. 2 4710 AG N ? 3' , .
AVINGTON. ROAD a e6
2 ^q
.. .3bd v �8 � yas.,_ - to W E
--178 I o
�3 pp,8� 3�3�pp33 11176 i /a.27 ,
C i'w 63
�� 14 8 ea : L8 ea 7mn 9 18u 2 nog 21a�gaR 1 g . a o� -0086 ^0 35.74
v< mm g Nmg Na�8 o ` W 170 �. " 7 8 5 4 : 43 5
S w33310 .o oR^ Oj 7nse . t' 8463
3.�U;
0013 Snea a
$ ,os a as. ea 5 • ' 170
14 1 1 mrg gl 0 m�`8' g_ $� 3 $ •� ..1 ..%...
�9 _.
109 ' "'] �I � e07e
FACET.
.m4 - ea-8 . �,.
��aaeel 5e .� ° , , „sz AS tla 8 45 �.
B8 N ASHWYNE LANE: e$ °.6053 A
• L rst
yj eae 61 _ 77e12a • et ANC' !
16 •e d e ao
g
so
so eo
21 '. 22.'
eo60
23
27
$ -00��
la ep 10 •eau .„ l2
3'°�t2oo - .. .. ..
fits 1u 19
17
�►� g
20
a
mr
&44 mQ
oiv g8
upg4 '
am8
_
1$
..
x 25 �•aa
ASyW.
•
485
p
a 1 `.
90.
29
ea52
28. ' 13 :
e 59 3329 -
2s Mee
.. ,�y7���,8
7
J �4
: " B
. ' .. ' W.58 '
..'.
a OOKGLEN '-R P "' •'
•,:• ".
31aaa2
' ffi Fi
.> 8
e�1'1 F
S
.
'
a- 17na•.:
I
26 3.a•,3
0
. ..
R ,: p ;
I .
®UUMU//
Pill
PREPARED 6/12/63, 8:48:31
CUSTOMER ACTIVITY LIST
FAGS.. 1.
PROGRAM MR4301,
CITY OF LA PORTS
FROM DATE'................00/00/00 '
TO DATE ,.:..:..-00/00/-------
CUSTOMER ID.'.....:'.' .178 NAME:
.KARPEAK,/BRKGLEN I B-6 L 6
LAST STATEMENT...: 12/23/02. :ADDR:
.100 523 000 0006
•.pgND " ON
ING TRANSACTI
CURRENT BALANCE..: ,.:...5,084.10,'.
BROOKGLEN'I B '6 L 6
.., PENDING......::...:. .00 . •
LA PORTS,' TX 77571
„ PREVIOUS -'BALANCE.: S,084&70 STAT:
.A ACTIVE.• MOWING/DEMOLITION
----------------- -----------------
• TRANS:': .' :' :..
'DESCRIPTION
ORIGINAL AMOUNT
----- ---------------
-'
LAST CHG ." AMOUNT PYMT
DATE, .. CODE- ''-INV #
-------------------'--'=.---'=---'-'---=---=-------
AMOUNT UNPAID
OVSRDUS•'
AGE .
BILL TYPE UNAPPLISD TYPE
4/25/00 LM01' LOT MOWING/DEMO
---150.00--�--------------------150.00---090.
12/23/02--- ------
7/28/99 ..LM01.. LOT MOWING/DEMO•
140.00 ..
'140.00
090
12/23/02•'.
9/18/98' LN01' LOT MOWING/DEMO
70.00
"- 70.00
.•
090
-12121/92
12/16/97 LM01-` LOT. MOWING/DEMO
70..00
70.00.
090
12/23/02
10/01/96. '.:LM01 • :: LOT. MON_ ING/MONI
. ..
4,'654.70, .; ' ',
- •4,654 70
Q
12/23/02
TOTAL CHAR .: GSS•
S.084.70.00
:5,0.84.70,.
TOTAL PAYMENTS:
•
' •'-' r •'� . • .,. REPORT TOTAL CHARGES':. '
,5;084.70 - .00
:5,084•:70
•
;•<. REPORT TOTAL PAYMENTS:
:...
00. _--
---
A/30
OMMARY'OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY •
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
•1023-255-078-0003 Property Struck'off for:
CAUSE. NO:
1999-00951 .
PLAINTIFF(S):.
City of La Porte & La Porte Independent School District
JUDGMENT AGAINST:
Gordon Baumbach
JUDGMENT DATE:.....
October 5, 2000. STRUCK OFF DATE:
March 6, 2001
ORDER OF SALE:
..January 11, 2001
DEED RECORDED DATE:
March 23, 2001 STRUCK OFF TO:
City of La .Porte
CONSTABLE:
_'
Bill Bailey,. Constable Precint No 8...
PROPERTY ADDRESS::
1003 S Third Street
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 4 & S 18ft of Lot 3 & N' 14ft'of Lot 5. Block 178.La Porte
ADJUDGED VALUE (IN JUDGMENT):'.. $22,500.00,
SQUARE FOOTAGE:.
7,125 , ...
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
.BIDDER: Agile Homes;
Inc BIDDER'S ADDRESS:.
1003 S Third. Street-.'
AMOUNT OF BID: :
$7,900.00 .:.
La Porte; TX 77571 . .
.AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT:
$790.00
AMOUNT.DUE:
$7,110.00 BIDDER'S PHONE NO:
281-331-6001,
PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT''
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
AL.
'/o.
SCHOOL'
%
CITY : '-
%
TOTAL -
AMOUNT DUE:
' . $5,029.98
26.82%
. $8,229.08
43.87%
$5.498.61
: 29.31%
.. $18-757-67
ASSOCIATED COSTS ON ORIGINAL AND SEALED. BID SALES.
CONSTABLE/' : • ..
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF
COURT. '
PUBLICATION FEE
AD'LITEM
RESEARCH FEE &
TO BE PRORATED TO
BID.
COST
(TISD)
FEE
DEED RECORDING FEE
• TAXES
$7,900.00
$662.00
$175.00
$0.60
$250.00
$6,813.00
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION .
OWED TO
COUNTY
% .
SCHOOL
%
CITY
% "
TOTAL
PRORATED .. .
AMOUNT .'
$1,826.95
26.82%
$2,988.90 •
43.8- f
$1,997.16
'29.31%
$6,813.00
Amount of Bid:
-
$7,900.00
Costs: .
-District.clerk.
$612.00
... ,
-Tax Master
$50.00
Y
:.
-Constable °Fee"
$0.00
.
-Publication
$175.00
:. .
-Abstract Fee
$250.00
...
-Cost
$3,890.00 Asbestos & Dangerous.
Building Removal on, 10/17/01
-Ad Litem Fee-..
.' $0.00
Total: .$2,923100....'
.
Taxing .
Jurisdictions:,
'Amount in Judgment:
'/o
Amount Received'
:. City of La Porte
.
$5,498.61
29.31 % :.:..
$856.85 .
La Porte ISO
$8,229.08 .: ' '
43.87%
$1,282.33
Harris County `
:
$4,289.18..
22.87%.:.
$668.38
San Jacinto CCD
$740.80
3,95%
$115.44 -
State of Texas _
$0.00:
0.00% •:
$0.00
$18,757.67
:100.00% ..
.$2,923.00
Costs + Taxes .
$23,734.67
Adjudged Value
$ 22,500.00
::. ' ` ; -
P118• • . .
ill.tflJ. tlyjJlL115i1a 1�GGVau LVKua -. .-
.. _ a a�v a va a .
Eras
Real:. Account Number'- Address :' Owner Name: - Advanced .: .
Personal: Account Number. Address: Owner Name Advanced
proved: Residential ,Property.Data
7-Ac
umber: 02325S0780003
:' Tax Year :. 2001cation
: 1003 S. 3RD ST
View Main Screen.. = '
Parcel 20. - 00921.6. - .22.0 - 002.0 .- 0 / 000 -. 001 9. .,
.., . ..
Card
ID .
Land 161 -- Residential.
.- Land Area 7,125.sq. ft. :
Use : 1 Family
CAMA RI1 -- Residential
Map Facet : 6253A'..'•.
Class :Improved .::.
Total Uviggf Units : 1....:.: :. ::. ::.:. ..
`' : Key Map :'540X
Year Built / .Remodeled : 1950 /.'.1981 ..
Neighborhood : 2158
Stjile :Traditional-
Exterior Wall ; Shake
. :.:
Shingle ..
Stories : 1
Foundation":: Slab
Living Area : 1,582• "sq. ft.
Heating / Air :' None -
Bed'/. Bath :.4. / 4 full,. 1 half ;
• Attic :None
:- .:.
Rec / Total Rooms : 0 / T •
. ,. ...
Physical . .. .
Poor.. • ::
Condition
Wood Fireplace : 0'
Grade- :�.D+
- .. Metal Fireplace : 0
Status : Dwelling
Other Carport
'Shed
For any pro or questions .with' any account, please email. u§ with the
account number (if you have it).and the nature of the problem or question.:.
Home Records:: Maps. - Forms ` :
.."Links' Index. " ' . N
:: http://www.hcad.org/cgi-bin/CAMA/ResImprpved.asp?acct=0232550780003&card=l ' ..;.':::; :: 4/10/01
253A8 .
9.
:«
« 9_' 23 _R 0.__t„:_r 23 __ 1- ___ txs R �___--nE
1e_ 1: 0_-717 _- 23 -- - - _« 2l_.____R tx5 .
?� t_0_A 22 _SC .:. t__Z_�1':':_�Z 4�- l2_-7Y3.-R 21_9_?. 2 73 R Zp_ _R.'`.•«�3_.__-_p.
21 .' « Z_ +a+lt - - .p020- - . 0008 _ 11- - q -Harris .
1x5 R ZO R 3_ �xs _ _ « ZO_ _i q : R 9: @ _ R 4 7-729'.�-R 18'Q:_ _�7_2y7�R 5 0014R 18t07 - 17 t R 8 County . .
5- W4 - - 17 - R 17 t «
R 16
R 7 s _ Al�pra�s:al.
WEST G STREET .. .: ' . :•.;.,,. .., .. «32 , -« . • R1. � - ■ ■ .: .
,x5 R Rl R31
D'stric' -.`..
zs } • «32 _ _ - - - -� - = - - R P-4
03 -A 3 �g-C�24 0031_ vi2 13
_s- 0f22 _ « •' 3 ----�
_ 1 R 21_ _ 20
2 0029 _ 19 R _ - - ' ' a 20 Ix5 R R20
Txx 9
•-q-�q-- - -- 5 •Otn4 R 19:_,_:� ------ - - .
--
R17
g��l5 x ------ 16. ,
8_R 18_[IOU__ 18-'--- 17.
-- o R 1 «.
IB. 17 R •..p .
200. `
~, 12 «32 N P BUCATION DATE: :. ...
N WEST- ..H . STREET : us al ,m : «32. ; _ 1x5 R 32 ,gxO�Z� o ,.� «_z_Qggl_ : _ 91 W s.Pxatnbar 26. 2000
t:
t0 1x5 R n1 R32 2-- -.R 1 �ozs_.._ _ 1G
�:..., R ..•' «I___._-- R32•----'- .. « «31---`-� 2--- ---- R.'-' _ R 30..;„ R
1.
---- „�9 --- 4 �DL--
« 4 - -0001 2_8 R R 27 -002p _
., _ _ - 8 '" -
g' ---= R5' ------- ---------
- R _ 27 « 7 2 R 26 R
R ., RB__---� ---- R � .' R 7:�fl_« 28 g
R 7._ : _ _ _ 28 .. R li 8
7_-0001-« 28__'--xi 9 �xs im': 79.,' 8 ,:5 R 8�. 3_R Zq __ - _
8 txe 25 ,x5 g_ �_ 23 2 W E
RZink 0 _
9 - -• - - _ g jg :•' 0 - R 23 0023 _ « s
9 _ - - - - « 23 AOOa_ ,; « 22 ,xs
.-0001:S
` «
71
18-----r 5----- R i
�o o-Z-- --
:.. • A : .:'• If.• a : 1 �� R . FACET"'
WEST I STREET « d x A3E -- �Q1
"'. a•32_'---- R1' :----- ---- A,�----- a n9l -0o2a_ A 2 --R
n l>.. a.,: •� _---- - «z 6253A
a2-�--- it 1i31 --- a2==--- a a ,_ '� 30__---R-
a31 - a .:------t. �'--- �''�a_304'7
a:' -- R Aa---'--'p q29-
a3 _q- 2_S -: A
a30 a ----- R_ :..A�----.-.A A28_'y�/��,�8. a----- 7 2 3 q
® ae2298`':_:'____'_;x `aaa458--- ---.------ n,l.C1r 2-8-�_iO�w..-_p � •• °5----- aaa aaa22Z5
56=---7 -.-----�' it's-
7 AA'f )- -
R 8
0 7 -a- 25 S 6.
a27 1 1 ■. A7 « pp
a ., a7_:---'a1 ra.7�--�-_. -_---' .a25 N a 8_'�-.R. _-_-� -9-__'__ A 4 A' 9 Jxe::«
10 Al
6253C4
P. O. Box 58249 Houston; Texas 77258-8249.-'
Respeftly Submitted- a..-Y 1
Any alteration or deviation from above apecKxatbns involving extra'
coals. wW be executed only upon wruMn ordem and will biome an
Par Xm ' An. SM -rtd ' P. E
extmdurgeoverindabmlheesdmte.ASagreementsconiingeM...-
r.i w to l .
upon strikes, aeeklents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry.
- .. -
rim, tornado and other necessary :hiuran ce upon above work
Workmenb Compensatkxi and Public Liability Insurance on above
`
work carried by ALL TEXAS DEMOLISHING. Environmental
.. 'NDta -Tait pmpDsld.may be withdrawn by us d rlDt, axepted . " .
remediallon. ti required. not induded'unless.spsdaed above
MMhie'^ `days
A/40
SQUAKE
SUMMARY OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY.,
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
006-114-000-0042 Property Struck off for: Taxes. .
:. CAUSE NO-
2002-38833 ,.
PLAINTIFF(S):.:.
City of La Porte &'La Porte Independent School District
JUDGMENT AGAINST:
Madenwald, Marceldine
JUDGMENT DATE:
December 20, 2002 STRUCK OFF DATE:..June 3, 2003
ORDER OF SALE:
'April .1.0, 2003 .
DEED RECORDED DATE:
June 18, 2003 STRUCK OFF TO: -City of La Porte -
CONSTABLE::
Bill Bailey, Constable Precint No 8'
PROPERTY ADDRESS:'.
734 S Blackwell -Street
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 42.&. Tr.43 Block 24 (15ft of Lot 43) Block 24 Bay -front to La Porte
ADJUDGED VALUE (IN JUDGMENT): • . $15,100.00:
FOOTAGE
5 000
- SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
BIDDER:' Hummingbird Homes, Inc BIDDER'S ADDRESS: 722 Garden Oaks Blvd. ..:: .
AMOUNT OF BID: $4,500:00 Houston, TX 77018
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT: . $450.00
AMOUNT DUE: '$4,050.00 BIDDER'S PHONE NO: 713-699-5775-:
DRnRATGn 01=0rGNTA(:Gn nF TAXFti nl IF Tr) FArH .II IRmnirTInN RASFn I IPnN :II ln(;MFNT
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
AL.
..
%
SCHOOL
%
CITY'
%
TOTAL•.
AMOUNT DUE
$1,1.72.68
37.87%
$1,340.65
43.29%
$583.63
18.85%
$3,096.96
ASSOCIATED COSTS ON ORIGINAL AND SEALED BID SALES.
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF-
"COURT
CONSTABLE/PUBLICATI
AD LITEM
RESEARCH FEE &•
TO BE PRORATED TO
BID
COST
ON FEE TISD
FEE
DEED RECORDING FEE
:• TAXES
$4,500.00.
$863.00
$175.00 '
$0.00
$250:00 .
$3,212.00
PRnRATFn TAX AM011NTR TO FACH .It1RISDICTI()N
OWED TO
COUNTY
%
SCHOOL
%
CITY
%.
TOTAL .
PRORATED ..
AMOUNT.
$1'1216.24
37.87% .
$1,390.45
43.29%
$605.31
18.85%
$3,212.00
..�
Amount of Bid:
- $4,500.00
Costs:
-District Clerk
. $813.00
-Tax.Master :
$50.00 Michael Landrum
-Constable Fee
$0.00
-Publication
$175.00
. .
-Abstract Fee .
. $250.00...
-Cost
$11.00
:.
-Ad Litem Fee:
$0..00
Total:.: $3,201.00-
Taxing
Jurisdictions:
Amount in Judgment:
% '
Amount Received
City of La Porte..
, .. ..
$583.63 : , ...
18.85%
$603.24,
'La Porte.ISD
:. $1,340.65
: 43.29%
$1,385.69
Harris County
$1,172.68
37.87%
$1,212.08:
San Jacinto CCD .:... ;..
$0.00 .:...
0.00%.:
.; .. : $0.00'.-, :, ......
State of Texas
$0.00
.0.00%
$3,096.96-
100.00%
$3,201.00
Costs + Taxes
$4,395.96
;
Adjudged Value.
$ 15,100.00 . '
P196
;
Real: Account NLWr Address Owner Name Advanced
Personal: Account Number Address Owner Name Advar
Real Property Account
Preliminary Values
HCAD Account # : 0061140000042 Tax Year : 2003 In
Owner Name: MADENWALD MARCELDINE Ownership
History...
Owner Address: 734 S BLACKWELL ST
LA PORTE TX 77571-5827
Property Address : 734 S BLACKWELL ST
LA PORTE TX 77571
Legal Description : LT 42 & TR 43 BLK 24
15FTOFLT43
BAY FRONT TO LAPORTE
State Class Code : Al -- Real, Residential, Single -Family �.
Homestead Exemption : --
Special Exemption : --
Disabled Veteran Exemption(s) : --
Jurisdiction Codes : 020 040 047 071
Overlapping/Shared CAD : No Notice Date : 5/1/2003
Capped Account : No ARB Approved
Value Status : Noticed, Not
Certified
Your taxes will be based on Appraised Value, less applicable exemptions, if any.
Use market value for comparison with your neighbors.
The appraised value below will reflect the homestead cap if applicable.
Valuation : TY2003Pre
vious
Change Appraised
Value Market Value
Land :
7,500
0
7,500
Improvement :
8,200
0
8,200
Ag/Tmbr/Spc :
0
0
0
Total Value :
15,700
0
15,700 15,700
5-Year Value History...
Similar Owner Name Nearby Addresses Related Maps
1 Residential Improved Data
Harris County Tax Bill
Note:
Year 2003 (current year) values are still preliminary and not all values are
available. They are subject to change as a result of protests, corrections, and ARB
review. Values should be final by late summer. Also, if a preliminary value has yet
to be determined, values for the current year will be blank.
For any problems or questions with any account, please email us with the account number
6254D12
6ig� b 5 �' 'S49$'$ . 17' iL
.$ 2G ' O
�; 4i 8 �� i . 2E j A'
16' S';. $ ' /q $'cl ?°idp°'2Q'. ; o,N : Har.ris
"t4- 47 SIP,' $+e �V �xj '.•
o '° :lot' .$ k 2F A raosal
_. .n`}O'^'' � •�i /r,13�$ ' •�.nr1�,' 14 r �7, 2.. A D,str .C'`' iL�'168 ,'
AL
q/ ' ,'' '�(/ 59 / -'V '$' i i 'mil ' / �i i , ,'i \? p
,�0,4 49� �.•. •$ . �. i �..1'yr , ' ,(� •�.., i'31 2A-l•�' ' • • . 1,5.E A P1pa _
, 47' '$ /� , �i° 724.' $3j' , , ,�T •�s.�
-74
. �i ��i i 9i i i� /�/4g' .,' ,'. / fig• / $ ` 3
4?'
1
7 'Y'"`fi�' A4' i ' 49.i"
57� r
'.
7/38,
,h' Sl, 9p�,.. / .19,`� / ,$ ,g �4' 4 TBSA$
i'23r
m , e $.� 44' $i / r'27.; r a` `23 OF ' w . Scala T" _..200'
M ',� •'10 tl .'+Y , / 43' $, $ / �. ..� i28' '. •, ` 2),
_ • .-.r��.'r _ .. ' .` C .PUBLICATION DATE: .
In . t2. /, . 4z /. '�'" ? a w Jwyot, 2003
.�-.i.'.,.'...:. N ^p "i .,13 /�$ /, ., ., i41i4 i i ,'•,'30 2d'. I. .. ..
4 `
39,
,4
.... r1S . .17
16
3%
4
R �4'
sP i 14 i $ i �' 'v ' '
' ' �4 $ r � ' {� '28A $ aty 7 .,2
41
1,4
A
' ,ye,'1 ,.� r si � 4' /'34'. 3 A . 2 � . � O , .: •' Q
'21/\-
"' �$ A' '8 �- I FACET;'3937,
3734,Bunn
5.
t ?`
a,
•
B/le
HCAD Account #
Taxes + Costs
Adjudged Value
Offer Name:
Bid Amount:
Recommendation:
Reviewed By:
Recommendation to Audit Committee
023-209-000-0027
$5,664.77
$5,000
Tyrone Jones
$3,500.00
Approve
Reason:
Resale P028
Reject XBid is not sufficient to cover the costs associated
Reason: the judgment nor equal to the adjudged value.
Kathy Powell
At any time any jurisdiction that was party to the original tax suit can sell the property being held in trust
for the lesser of: the taxes + costs or the adjudged value set out in the tax suit.
1 /17/2005
9MMARY OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY •
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
023-209-000-0027 Property Struck off for:
CAUSE NO:
1998-29647
PLAINTIFF(S):
City of La Porte & La Porte Independent School District
JUDGMENT AGAINST:
Corbin, Elizabeth K
JUDGMENT DATE:
December 11, 1998 STRUCK OFF DATE:
ORDER OF SALE:
January 4, 1999
DEED RECORDED DATE:
STRUCK OFF TO:
CONSTABLE:
Bill Bailey, Constable Precint No 8
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
423 N Fifth Street
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lots 27 & 28 Block 90 Town of La Porte
ADJUDGED VALUE (IN JUDGMENT): $ 5,000.00
SQUARE FOOTAGE: 6,250
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
Value
City of La Porte
BIDDER: Tyrone Jones BIDDER'S ADDRESS: 6338 N FM 565
AMOUNT OF BID: $3,500.00 Baytown, TX 77520
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT: $350.00
AMOUNT DUE: $3,150.00 BIDDER'S PHONE NO: 281-630-7301
PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO EACH AIRISDICTION RASFn I IPnK1 -n InMAPKIT
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
AL.
%
I SCHOOL
I %
CITY
%
TOTAL
AMOUNT DUE
$1,048.54
24.93%
$2,051.46
48.77%
$1,106.77
26.31%
$4,206.77
ASSOCIATED COSTS ON nRlr;INAI ANn cFA1 Rn Pin cn1 Rc
CONSTABLE/
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF
COURT
PUBLICATION FEE
AD LITEM
RESEARCH FEE &
TO BE PRORATED TO
BID
COST
(TISD)
FEE
DEED RECORDING FEE
TAXES
$3,500.00
$283.00
$175.00
$750.00
$250.00
$2,042.00
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS Tn FACN .n IRIcnIr.T1nn1
OWED TO
COUNTY
%
SCHOOL
%
CITY
%
TOTAL
PRORATED
AMOUNT
$508.97
24.93%
$995.80
48.77%
$537.24
1 26.31%
$2,042.00
Amount of Bid:
$3,500.00
Costs:
-District Clerk
$233.00
-Tax Master
$50.00
Michael Landrum
-Constable Fee
$0.00
-Publication
$175.00
-Abstract Fee
$250.00
-Cost
$0.00
-Ad Litem Fee
$750.00 Fred Bosse
Total: $2,042.00
Taxing
Jurisdictions:
Amount in Judgment:
%
Amount Received
City of La Porte
$1,106.77
26.31%
$537.24
La Porte ISD
$2,051.46
48.77%
$995.80
Harris County
$902.81
21.46%
$438.23
San Jacinto CCD
$145.73
3.46%
$70.74
State of Texas
$0.00
0.00%
$0.00
$4,206.77
100.00%
$2,042.00
Costs + Taxes $5,664.77
Adjudged Value $ 5,000.00 P028
•t\ �1'A
V HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DIsT&
?r REAL PROPERTY ACCOUNT 0232090000027
y 2004 ACCOUNT INFORMATION
STATE CLASS CODE: X1 -- Governmental Exempt
OWNER INFORMATION
LOCATION INFORMATION
Owner Name: CITY OF LA PORTE
Property Address : 423 N 5TH ST
Owner Address: CAUSE NO 98-29647
LA PORTE TX 77571
PO BOX 1115
Legal Description : LTS 27 & 28 BILK 90
LA PORTE TX 77572-1115
LA PORTE
EXEMPTIONS INFORMATION
JURISDICTION INFORMATION
Homestead Exemption: E --Total Exemption
Code Jurisdiction/Taxing Unit
2003 2004
Special Exemption : --
Rate Rate
Disabled Veteran Exemption(s) : --
020 LA PORTE ISD
1.68000 1.73350
040 HARRIS COUNTY + RELATED ENTITIES 0.64627 0.64627
047 SAN JACINTO JR COLLEGE DISTRICT
0.13913 0.13913
071 LA PORTE, CITY OF
0.71000 0.71000
VALUE STATUS INFORMATION
Notice Date : Value Status : All Values Certified
Capped Account: No ARB Approved : 8/6/2004
VALUATION INFORMATION
Valuation 2003 Appraised Change 2004 Appraised
2004 Market Value
Land : $0 $0 $0
Improvement: $0 $0 $0
Ag/Tmbr/Spc : $0 $0 $0
Total Value: $0 $0 $0
$0
RESIDENTIAL VACANT DATA
Card Parcel ID : 20 - 00921.3 - 05.0 - 053.0 - 0 / 000
- 001 4
1 Land Use: 100 -- Residential Vacant Land
Land Area : 6,250 sq. ft.
CAMA Class: RVO --Residential Vacant
Map Facet: 6254C
Key Map: 540X
Neighborhood : 2164.1
« «
29--------
" ----------
„5
- - -
A
«
-------
A-
F26------xi
ry----
A7 —«
a27 «
F26_o- --
"6 ,xs
R A
a27- - -
F25-------
A 25 o n
A S_ _ C;'
25 5?U -
a 9
«229 4
- -
„
A23?tO "------
-ry
"
A22-0w
FllA22-
"
A22r
All
_ rev- n
A
IN
a21 «
------- „
«I-
"
A
--------
ry18 "
„la
"
A
„
F18__---_-_
"
F
----
F17 ,zs A
„ "
"16 +ss
NORTH E STREET
(UNIMPROVED)
125
A32_125
A.
A
-
20s2
-,n2
3
004"
46
- -
AFA=A"«33
—
--------
58
1
27F2- g-ssi
A22222222-0864-352
-
F......
621
j-
z-
2g28
A8
W 9
«23
�^24 °'
O
___
A22
N
'
I
21
A
-
A123
------
20
"18 Us
„
AI9 IN „
rL
_ „14 „
"
F19 - - -
_ "14_0073---
-
" ]7
"
«17 «
--- --
6 „
O A1,zs
„
F17 ,zs "
O F16 us
"
,zs
Z
WEST MADDISON STREET
Z
(UNIMPROVED)
«-27 - -
-- -
--- R--------- 2
8 « 25 ,zs —
„ 9 -002Z _ _ _ " 24
A11 ------.T A 22_OM_
CL
F 14 13„ F 19 ,xs
F15 00a5- � 18-00a7-=
iR�... «17 .
F 1_ 1z6
432 ,zs
F2-0001__ «
F3i-qq���_^
F 3 ,ss`=
n3U t124--
A 6 +xs
A 27 In a
_
A �0007 F
A 26 aZ
W
{a=
A 25 ,xs
«24�I
ng
F10 ` A
A23 ,ss _
F 22_��0_ _
F 21 gz7It F13 _QQIz_ A
.125u
A15�0�f5--"25
A19 +zs
ozB
1717
Z
«l6 Us
,ss „
us „
A
F 1 fss
q
-0001---
A 32 Us
A3t-D029
A
qqgg
n„30
a31.$030--�
M 3
---------
A30 125
„ 29
--^
« 42L9-
,z5
�s�ss 9
„ 4 ,xpps _ A
F 505 _ - A
«29 zxs A
«28,002Z _ _ _A
"
_27 Us _ "
„
F 7 416�--A
F 27-446c7
F260025 „
F 6 ,:s "
A 7 4 _^
4
"_2s0 5_-_"
Si j tF
„
A 26 4 7� A
Oa25--
"25 Us __ -
-003 „
a S _ xs ,=
F 25 ,a
F24-0023
8 ,psi
A 9 a2,
00
A 25_ ,xs
124. ,.
1 -
�r, „
0023---
--
«10_ ,xs_. xi "23 ,ss
,22 ,xs
A
A23
n=s1"_
22 -0021_
oil F
„21
A20,g „"
Al2 ,xs_—n
^A1134_DqqO]3__ „
^20 yu�s
g r
"-
A13-------
A20=00]9__
F
9I9 us=
U
1940SI1S
8«FI5
�d,,ss
7-
l14-S6
FA-1
:5__
^18_�Z_
17 ,s
---
,xs
"17 ,sA16
WEST TYLER STREET
1zs „
A A32 135
ss
„2
F 32 ,a
-------
- "
F «
A 29 _
-------- A30_nn c --�
-3 "
F 29 ns _ a
"4-------- --
4 , :s
AS-0005---"
A A
A28 -------
--- "
6254C12
A 1 ,zs
F32 ,ssg
2-0A
A31$31--
«3 gg ,ss«
_
A30-0029- A
4- _0003- :3
29 F
F 5 -0005 A
g,26
2
A28_007
a� 42`2 ,zs«
a41�-
F 27 us F
8
-0
a 9 _O6
j}OOD9" *'s"-
„
«22 ,zs «
F 1 _00�
F21 A
A
014 0"{ A
F 15 25 A
19
118
C3
-------
-----
+4 -
"29 ------
-----
5
«6
« _- -'_-----
�,;� Harris
1�24 891 County
Appraisal
Nx District
US
A 12 us
F2-0--1 -
A31-0030 n
--A
1030 In _
«4�nos
F29-0028 _
A S «
A28 +zs
«
A 7 -
---
«26 Us
WF
W
8 n
«25-- -
a24_
W
„9-_A
-
--
(n
«
A23
A22=0017n
cn
«ll
Z
04
a
ital5
-----_ A
A18 -
Q
A16 In
F17 ,zs
O
Z
Z
7_ _ =QQ3.4
18 In
9 _ _ 0007_
10 125 -
131 fss
F 2 --
130 - - =
F 3---
1-29 - -_ -
-
A 4 _ O(
-29 - n
A 5---
C27_OQ3$_
y.--
N24 J-
.9
+n �.
0 100 200
PUBLICATION DATE:
12/28/2004
N
CD
CN W E
s
MAP LOCATION
14
115 - FACET
116 6254C
"1-
1
2
3
4
12
~3'
5
6
7
4_
�5
«6
_7
9
10
11
12
0
B/20
AARY OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY •
HCAD ACCOUNT NO: "
024-1577000-0048
Property Struck off for:
Value:
CAUSE NO:
1998-55148 "
PLAINTIFF(S):
City of La Porte & La Porte Independent
School District '
-JUDGMENT AGAINST:
Blackwell;. O A
. • JUDGMENT DATE::
September 13, '1999
STRUCK OFF DATE:
January 4, 2000 .
ORDER OF SALE: '
October 27, 1999;
DEED RECORDED DATE:
January 14, 2000
STRUCK OFF TO:
City of La Porte
CONSTABLE:
Bill Bailey, Constable Precint No 8 .
" PROPERTY ADDRESS:
Lobit . .
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lots 5, 6, 7 & 8 Block 988 La Porte
+
ADJUDGED VALUE (IN JUDGMENT): $ 6,300:00
SQUARE FOOTAGE:
12.,500 :.'
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
BIDDER:.. Jessica McGlothlin
BIDDER'S ADDRESS:
1422 Magnolia_ Bend West
AMOUNT OF BID: � - -
$5,000.00
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT::.
$500.00 '
AMOUNT DUE:
$4,500.00
"BIDDER'S PHONE NO:
281-573-4684
-" PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT.
COUNTY, ET
" ASSOCIATED COSTS ON ORIGINAL:AND
SEALED BID SALES "
JUDGMENT TO
' AL:
"% '
�
SCHOOL
-•
%�
CITY
% �
.TOTAL
AMOUNT -DUE
$1,418.34
20.95°%
$3,402.33
50.25%
$1,950.62
. 28.81%
$6,771.29
ESTIMATED AMOUNT.
AMOUNT OF.
COURT
CONSTABLE/PUBLICATI
AD LITEM
. RESEARCH FEE &
TO.BE PRORATED. TO
:BID
-COST
ON FEE (TISD)
'FEE '."
DEED RECORDING FEE
TAXES .
$5,000.00
: $1,054.00
$175.00.
$406.25
$250.00
$3,114.75
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION
OWED TO
COUNTY
%
SCHOOL
%
CITY
0/6TOTAL
"
PRORATED.-
AMOUNT•
$652.43
: 20.95%
$1,565.05
50.25%
$897.27
28.81%
$3,114.75
:. Amount.of Bid:
$5 000.00.
Costs:
-District Clerk ..
$1,004.00
-Tax Master
$50.00
_
-Constable Fee
::.. $0.00
-Publication
$175.00
-Abstract Fee :
$250.00.
'.
-Cost
$0.00:
-
..-Ad Litem :Fee
$406.25 Lavonne Brunt
"
Total:,. $3,114.$3,114.75-
Taxing
Jurisdictions:
Amount in Judgment: '
% '
Amount Received
City of La Porte.
$1,950.62 -.
..28.81%
$897.27 ..
La Porte ISD
$3.,402.33
50.25% -•
$1,565.05 '
Harris .County
$1,214.55 ' •
17'.94%
$558.69 '
San Jacinto CCD:
; ;' $203,79 • :...
3.01%. ::
$93.74 • . :: ;
State of Texas
$0.00 , "
0.00%
$0.00.
:
$6.71.29 :
100.00% . -.$3,114.75...
Costs + Taxes $8,656.54
Adjudged Value.' $ . 6,300.00 .
:.. ..
P040.
1,16 125
g2 Harri's
4,
29
Va.. 25%
3
Z6 %t % % 4
7 2
W ;5040029 4,j' - % % % Cou'' nty
4 4 .0042 ZQ 126 bk@N% %
32,125 fbg�q — 2
a %
al.
- 3 R1.1n pprais
5 5 % % A
13 30 !Q
Z
*00 7
District.
26-OW. 14 7 Is
5-OM5 -
59 "W
84 -0043 kp %
9029 12-16 v %
A 24 :D - 9 -3.`titie 0
A - - - - - - - z sin 288 11 2
�24 tie
- Z I %
A. z
3. W 0 23 it 03 %
> 125 26 .:-W.
X 22 it > I t-4m- Fo
-QD4:k'
0'
ftl
ga-«
od 1�2 W
14
0
Is 19 . 17 %
U E- .% 6 -43
O.
Vrdw.% 1.
%I %
0 % .% % b
04 --------
STREET..
0
z
dTLPX hs
20
0 ' % %
4
4R 7 81
3
6 law, b :f4O'
5 96
V7` scale. I i0o
PUBUCA rioN DATE 0 9
86
117 Dotobei,06,199
CAI'
�4
33'
40,
-39
ro v
4
X.
2 36,
2 40
76
25 3,' v
12
7 7,
% ' POO."
%4 %% %%
47,
40
4.. 49
UZI 25,
7 FACET:T
6 40, '31 �24
116
-V
.62
JV
to
13. 25,
0- 7 V, ;24,
2
17 .0
IVY
Munn
MIN
MIN
Tax Statement
... .. - - .Page 1 of 1 .
.1999 Property Tax
Statement
Statement Date
March 23, 2000
Account Number'
. ..024-157-000-0048
•
•
B/30
Recommendation to Audit Committee
4LMA,R'Y OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY.....
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
023-185-000-0001 &' 023-185-000-0029
CAUSE NO:.
2000-35440 .
PLAINTIFF(S):
-.'City of La Porte & La Porte Independent School District
-JUDGMENT AGAINST::
White, Edward
JUDGMENT DATE:
September 14, 2001 STRUCK OFF DATE:
June 4, 2002...
ORDER OF SALE:..
April 16, 2002
DEED RECORDED DATE':'
July 1, 2002 STRUCK OFF TO:'
City of La Porte :
CONSTABLE:
Bill Bailey, Constable.Precint No 8'
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
State Highway 146
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 1. & 34 Block 52 La Porte
ADJUDGED VALUE( IN JUDGMENT): . $14,000.0.0 •
SQUARE FOOTAGE:
6,250.:
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
BIDDER:. - Dennis R.,.McClung BIDDER'S ADDRESS:
631 Baywood .
AMOUNT OF BID:
$12;000.00
Shoreacres, TX 77571'` .
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT:.
$1,200.00
AMOUNT DUE: -
$1.0,800.00 BIDDER'S PHONE NO:.
281-861-1338 :
PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET"
AL.
%
SCHOOL
%' ,
CITY
%
TOTAL . .
AMOUNT DUE
- $3,841.20
. • 24.90%
$7,533:731.
48.83%
$4,053.32
26.27%
$15,428.25
ASSOCIATED COSTS ON ORIGINAL AND SEALED RID SAI FS
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF
COURT'
CONSTABLE/PUBLICATI
AD LITEM
RESEARCH FEE &
TO BE PRORATED.TO
BID
COST
ON FEE (TISD)
FEE - :
DEED RECORDING FEE
'TAXES
$12,000.00
$842.00
.. . $350.00.
$1,000.00
$250.00
$9,558.00
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION
.
OWED TO .
COUNTY
%
SCHOOL
%
CITY
%
TOTAL
PRORATED
AMOUNT
$2,379.67
.24.90%
$4,667.24
48.83%
$2,511.08
26.27%
$9,558.00
Amount of Bid:
$12,000:00
Costs:
-District Clerk '
$792.00
-Tax Master
$50.00 Chris Stacey
-Constable Fee..
$t):00
-Publication
$350.00
-Abstract'.Fee
$250.00
".
-Cost
$0.00...
-Ad Litem Fee.
$1,000.00 Thelma Elizalde ,
Total: $9,558.00.
. Taxing
Jurisdictions:
Amount in Judgment: '
%
Amount Received .
City of La Porte
.$4.,053.32-
'V,533.73
2Q.27%.
. $2,511.08 .
La Porte ISD'.
-
48.83%' -
$4,667.24 :
Harris County.
$3,290.64
. •21.33%•
$2,038.59
San Jacinto CCD .-
$550.56'.
3.570%
$341.68
State of Texas - .
$0.00
0:00% :
$0.00
$15,428.25..
100.00% ..
$9,558.00.. •.. ,
Costs + Taxes `
$17,870.25..
..
Adjudged Value
$. 14,000.00
P147
•_ _
-�_._:_« �_.,=s--- 8 e-� ;._r: Harms .:
25 ,65-
��Q__� s--- Z-=.=- �p =-� --=- 1= County.-.
0----- --- 1232_- «. l2:'_--- 21_D018_ .'. _2 ,.:
22_�019_ 2------n 21 A. 3 'txs «' - „ 3 ■
. 12--'---� 21-' '�------ z0-00N-- 4 __ p_.�5- _° 4-g[, 2-
�« 21_0_.--- „ 20 .. 4 19. _ ---= a 15_•0014 :a
At
„ _
5----
« 4_-0011:n 19 « 17 , 18 ix5 1os
= ---=
District
•
17
« 17
„ g 4« 17
1 - �; _ « 2 �N APP l�
,_ -« ., F7.---« -----« 30_,_is_•.- 3---• V�, d
31'.- -- 1 3--30
4 « 29. « 3 fA
«..1 « 29 J>003- - - - �i
30v002� - n 4' -4 '. R ' 229 -- _.:R 26 - - - - « 5 ' 'ns « 2B.Op27- = g us a
n zs _ _ _ : _ - - 01 _ - �0027 _2.2a _ _ N - p 2 .1as _�y1 ti.
27' •' 2t7
28 1�G 7 _pOBB-'- -6
„ 27.. ' "': sr ..- .': �8 ,u-_ 27 mg �=--- 25 � 25 txs' «'''• *':.
ppy « 8 - - ....
5 8 « O1� _'° 9' • «_ &4,0024 ._
- - 125 « 25 9. iis5 . 23 txs « �010.'
25 'ub__« _ 4. 4 23. _' u5
_ «9' _ 2 Q-� --mom-'« 1:. «' 22-002t_
:. „. « - �y�
_'_ 21 ' izs_a ..
21 3
n 22 . ,x5 210_ � _ _ - _ -
--„ „2 «, ---_ 3..._.75----« 4 ,N 'goals 'in ..
.« 20. 3W • «19 -0034 . « . �m •' 4 _txs__;._ 19 _. "' 4-•0013 „ 18 7 .,_ 5_•QO PUBLICATION bATEI. .
... . - - 5 June 29, 2002
Epp
Aa� «�4t6--�« �- F85 «• 17 txs-_« 6 -____1B ,xN.
«3-
t «34 1
125 « «33: -.- - -125 la a A32
_ 10001 .1 « 132 - - - - - p a , �91 -
25••^« «33_ ---�: 134_--- -- :'. «t� 2 -- - -=--a. 3 5.
21- _ ' - - - 3 • -0002 R 1530_ _0027 _ _
t12 « «30 ---- .: ------ p29:- ='' 4-0.
a 4 ,is. . u - 1V E
3 « «30_•y 4_. .1&D-« �. „ p5 A R28 a x5
«29 5 _0o0G _ q 6 _0
---In „ --
1 « r29Op24_«''. „4 ;25 „ --- -----
--- « 8 ,xs
-. «2T�iss3. - �. 7 « 26� _ 1C 2t 7 - - „ 6-0
-- _Z _ « ZB-0p26- - 8. _,i15 • .- "' - 25 g •-�.�' 7l . i 24
�q� 16. -IN N 31 34 N, 24 34 N ■
�. 1u 2 • 1�,9 -�QA9. , .:. N 34 x1 x1 x. Is -
125.
1213 �446 N8 CO�2p21 22123 ' 1 1213 1`4 1518 191
��2► 1 ;2
6 1. I: I. 1 1 I. • I 1! .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 « 1 0.
N 24 j! 2 24
2/ 34 N 21 25 25 �2 32{ 1 � 21 11 24 1 1 1 1 10 1 I 1 1
�13�14�SI18�19� 21�2�1 L 14 5ia19 1 '. 1' �.4qqpp1,.. A�oa s"'_ 1 1 .1 1 .1 ' �' FACET
��•.�
41241241x11zel xs x.12
12
341N -. ,62.54C` .
-- - ..
1 4124124 21131124 24 24 26 -
y ' 26 25 25 • 25 25 25 25 1
_ -- xs 5>� 25 26a2 1,2,6,26'625 27 g �5 :3 iy'.1 I1�10'�29� g
': -_ I..J':• 6.15 41 12 1• 1 8
6 25 25 25 25 ad Zd 25 25 1 I 1 '1 «; » 4i �` p1j ar 1•� 1
1.413*1 1 9F�
p I 11 1 "151 1�.1x62525 25� 25
5 VLV V/'�V
Enum
Bunn
U®i/®
B/440
Recommendation to Audit Committee
*MMARY OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY •
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
056-263-001-0011..
CAUSE NO:
2002-00654
PLAINTIFF(S):
City of La Porte & LaPorte Independent School District
. � JUDGMENT AGAINST:
Storm, Donna Mae Kennedy, et al
JUDGMENT DATE:.
September 6, 2002 STRUCK OFF DATE:
March 4, 2003
" -ORDER OF SALE: •
December 5, 2002
DEED RECORDED DATE:
May 9, 2003 STRUCK OFF TO:
City of LaPorte
CONSTABLE:
Bill Bailey, Constable.Precint No 8
PROPERTY- ADDRESS: -
S Y Street
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 11 Block 1 Oakhurst Addition
ADJUDGED VALUE ( IN JUDGMENT): • $ 6,200.00
" SQUARE FOOTAGE:
4,000
'
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
BIDDER. H. Micah Christian BIDDER'S ADDRESS:
PO Box 1601 = : .
AMOUNT OF BID:
'$4,000:00' .
La Porte, TX 77572
. AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT:.
$400.00
_
AMOUNT DUE:
. $3,600.00 BIDDER'S PHONE NO:
281-867-9346
PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT.
. ASSOCIATED COSTS ON ORIGINAL AND SEALED BID SALES
•
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
I -.SCHOOL
1%..
CITY
%
-
TOTAL '
AMOUNT DUE
$1,388.28
. 29.64%
$2,076.43
" .44.33%
$.1,218.85
26.02%
. $4,683.56 '
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF'
COURT .
CONSTABLE/PUBLICATI
AD LITEM
RESEARCH FEE &-.'-
TO BE. PRORATED TO
BID
COST
-ON FEE (TIS.D)
FEE
DEED RECORDING FEE
'-TAXES
$4,000.00
$1,168.00
$175.00
$325.00
$250.00
$2,082.00
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION :
OWED TO
COUNTY
%
SCHOOL
%
CITY
%
TOTAL
PRORATED
AMOUNT
$617.1.4
29.64%
$923.04 ..
44.33%
$54.1.82
26.02%
' • $2,082.00
Amount of Bid:
$4,000.00
Costs:
-District Clerk
:. $1;118100
-Tax Master •
. $50.00
Mike Landrum
...
-Constable Fee
$0.00
-Publication
$175.00
-Abstract Fee
$250.00.
-Cost
$0.00.'...'..
-Ad Litem Fee
$325:00
Nina J. Taylor
Total: $2,082:00
:..
Taxing ..
Jurisdictions:
Amount in Judgment:
%
Amount Received "
City of La Porte .
$1,218.85
26.02%
$541..82
La Porte ISD
$2;07fi.43 : , .
44.33% :
' $923.04
Harris County
$1,192.02
25.45%. .
$529.89 . ".
San'Jacinto CCD .:
$196.26 :.' .: .'
4.19%'.:,
_$87.24
State of Texas -
:. : '. ' ...
$0.00
0.00% ,
$0.00
- •
$4 683.56 �
0 00%
10 ,
- $2.,082.00 -
Costs + Taxes •
$6,601.56 '
Adjudged Value
$ : 6,200:00P193
• 625265 ---
i'':IB B 7 B 6 t4 13 6252B6
96..!s 7 _
. t
R
p Q all w.. ... .. .. .aom
_. t — .. ]61exIQ 'im s • 1 $ X` 8e � •' WIN
1 B \ 1
.. \ 4
N gg
RES A Zm• if - ` 3 • ( 1 x .' .. • ' ••
' _ Of2.Bf2.0ppO01f g aoo . � _ •
'S. =AC d WOODS. 8AY .T
R t _ °woaoom
. I15-460 '-(b11RON AREA aa066 AC' .
ON TIE BAY 1 . .
.. _.'.. .. 9 = WOODS O
6839N
Y T
115_460 ..
m
1 •1 ' '4oa 2 ..
.262 � �.1
T I DEW00 x 3 1
6 kA
SEC. 1 -lab° 11 p � �uol iu+auimm .. i
am 1.BBBOAC
.. _ - . .. -
.. ..
.A 26x �.-A.t_m 7 . • �
RES. B 1•• ISO '.ly IBA if E0 >h EB i� 21
Ofiifl-0000020 n _�317 t e '$ '1 A B y� - - • .. 7.11b S's
AC..lop
M b
♦ N Y p I p M b IA 3'
CRrEShCTOmno
.. no LL S_
oie\ CRESCENT AVENUE
RES BI 1
o o 17B '1 0 617p 17 1818 16 11 �13 12 ,1 1 �0 0�9 B 17 B 2 ••`
'a• e fQ7
n6.1(q n0 ' 4p40 p N. li um pl w p-7• 2•" e 1 �bg�g
� m x 1 12 S m ♦)001 _ g
.. $ - -_
1 im . 3 m H I¢lQ �mg -
• - . ,•r r$r 34A 1- 6 . 6. zn7 B `Blfli4�—B
5A 3�44B 8 33�p2 f 6 s.� a 6- _� ; 6 .obi- w� - NBI°
ao•t1l.aaaoaf c 34D••1' 4e16f _ H 8 7 B g17 jlB3 H B H 7 s 1 a�• �'
�H ba BAYSHORE AVENUE 05B-009
B 7 B 9 10 !l 12 3 �1 6. I�IB 7 B f 4� \
miz 5K rAYSHORE AVE. N ;2 i3 ' 1 _ 6 r I
5B �\ • 4fno • A 95 Slo 1 X 4 $ 8 I ;�
tF N M a b 3 3
SBIO if07 -0DOS f t°_�Y ' W .' - 12 I 4 �C9 @2 QI
016x44-00141007 �.._ 41136 ]OB y� �31 I33 192 191 30 �Bf 125 >W a 1--1
12x00AC SJ r aofs .. ! 1�e� t ■� t, .1 a Ig 4
1� a al t ASoa
ry� .,« PINE BLUFF ST
' 6252D7
6252D2
B/50
Recommendation'to.Audit Committee
SUMMARY OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY.
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:,
023-208-089-0003 . ; . .: Property Struck off for:'
Value.. .
CAUSE NO:: :. •
1999-12071:.:.'.:: .
PLAINTIFF(S):,"
City of La Porte & La Porte In ependent.School District
."JUDGMENT AGAINST:.:
Young, Lucille etal
JUDGMENT DATE:-
April 11:1 2000 STRUCK OFF DATE:
.October 3, 2000
- ORDER .OF SALE: ' •
June •22, 2000
DEED RECORDED, DATE:.
October 17; 2000- .STRUCK OFF TO: :.
City of La Porte'.''. •:
CONSTABLE:.
Bill Bailey, Constable.Precint No 8
PROPERTY ADDRESS::
428 North Fifth Street
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:.
Lots 3 & 4 Block 89 La Porte"
." ADJUDGED VALUE ( IN JUDGMENT):'•
$14,300.00
SQUARE FOOTAGE:.
6,250 .' '
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
BIDDER:. Tyrone Jones
BIDDER'S ADDRESS:.-,
6338 N FM 565
AMOUNT OF BID:. .:
. $3,500.00
`. Baytown, TX 7752G-
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT:
$350.00
:
-AMOUNT DUE.:. ..
- $3,150.00 BIDDER'S PHONE NO:
281-630-7301' :
PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
AL-.
1
%
SCHOOL
%
CITY
%
TOTAL
AMOUNT DUE
$4,482.01.
24.01%
1604.85
47.49%
. $5,31.8.981
28.50%
. $18,665.84
ASSOCIATED COSTS ON ORIGINAL AND SEALED BID SALES
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF
COURT
CONSTABLE/PUBLICATI
AD LITEM
' RESEARCH FEE &
TO BE PRORATED TO
BID
COST
ON FEE (TISD)
''FEE
DEED RECORDING FEE
TAXES
13,500.00
$690.00
$175.00
$1,070.00
$250.00'.
$1,315.00
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION.
OWED TO `
COUNTY
%
SCHOOL
%. a
CITY
%
TOTAL .
PRORATED
AMOUNT.
$315.76'
24.01%'
$624.52
47.49%
$374.72 28.50% $1.,315:00
Amount of Bid:
: '...
$3,500.00
.Costs::
-District Clerk .
$640.00.. '.,.
=Tax.Master
$50.00 Chris Stacey.
-Constable Fee,
. $0.00•.1
- .
wPublication
;
-Abstract Fee .
$250.00 _
-Cost
$0.00
:.
•.
-Ad Litem Fee'.;
- ...• : $1 '070.00 .Ronald Nelson', Brown ..
Total: $1,315.00
•
-Taxing •
..
Jurisdictions:
Amount -in Judgment:--.: '•.'
%'. , -
Amount Received:
City of,La Porte
$5,31.8.98 .. '
28.50%
:: $374.72
La Porte ISD
'
$8,864:85.
. 47.49% .
: $624.52
Harris County-
..�..:
� • .. � ...:..
:_ -
• _$3,810.66.;;•:. `• ' :..'20.42%,
..�=
;. $268.46•., -.... •. ..
.
San Jacinto CCD.:.
$671.35 :`•.
.• 3.60%0
$47.30`.
State of Texas::.
•.::.
.,.:
$0.00
::0:00%
$0.00.' .
$18,665.84 _ .:100.00%...
$1.,315.00, ,:.
Costs +..Taxes..:
$20,856.84
Adjudged Value
$ 14,300.00 .: -;
: ,.. : ''; •: .'', P198
Real: Account Nu1W Address Owner Name Advanced
Personal: Account Number Address Owner Name Advar
Real Property Account
HCAD Account # : 0232080890003 Tax Year : 2000
Owner Name : CURRENT PROPERTY ONWER Ownership
t History...
Owner Address : 428 5TH ST
HOUSTON TX 77044-0000
Property Address : 428 5TH ST
LA PORTE TX 77571
Legal Description : LTS 3 & 4 BILK 89
LA PORTE
State Class Code : Al -- Real, Residential, Single -Family
Homestead Exemption : --
Special Exemption : C -- Prorated Exemption
Disabled Veteran Exemption(s) : --
Jurisdiction Codes : 020 040 047 071
Overlapping/Shared CAD : No Notice Date
Capped Account : No ARB Approved : 8/4/2000
Value Status : All Values
Certified
Your taxes will be based on Appraised Value, less applicable exemptions, if any.
Use market value for comparison with your neighbors.
The appraised value below will reflect the homestead cap if applicable.
Valuation : TY2000Pre
vious
Change Appraised
Value Market Value
Land :
5,000
0
5,000
Improvement :
9,300
0
9,300
Ag/Tmbr/Spc :
0
0
0
Total Value :
14,300
0
14,300 14,300
5-Year Value History...
Similar Owner Name Nearby Addresses Related Maps
Data
Harris County Tax Bill
Note:
For any problems or questions with any account, please email us with the account number
(if you have it) and the nature of the problem or question.
Home Records Maps Forms HCAD Info Links News
Munn
an
M
�,.
a®®®
B/60
Recommendation to Audit Committee
•
SUMMARY OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY
HCAD ACCOUNT NO: ..
023-197-066-0003 & -0033 . Property. Struck off for:.
Value
CAUSE NO:..
200.1-65458
PLAINTIFF(Sy:
:City of. La Porte & La Porte Independent School District .'.
JUDGMENT AGAINST:
Johnny -Joe Evans & Heirs'-.
JUDGMENT DATE:
:May 28, 2002 :.STRUCK OFF DATE::.
March 4; 2003.
ORDER OF SALE:..'
November 26, 2002
DEED RECORDED DATE:
May 9,- 2003. .. STRUCK - OFF TO:- :
City of La Porte:
CONSTABLE: •: ,
Bill Bailey, Constable Precint No 8
PROPERTY ADDRESS::
224 North -Sixth Street.: .
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: .:.
Lots 3 & 4 Block.66 La Porte
ADJUDGED VALUE (IN JUDGMENT):
SQUARE FOOTAGE:
61250
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
BIDDER:-:': Clenell.Carter
BIDDER'S ADDRESS:
3865 Pecan Circle"
AMOUNT OF BID:
$4,500.00';_
LaPorte,' TX.77571-.
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT:
.$450.00
AMOUNT DUE:. - ' ` .
:, $4,050.00 - .. BIDDER'S PHONE NO: ..281.-470=6734.
:.
PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO EACH'JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
. AL..
% .• .:
SCHOOL .%
:` %
CITY:.
%
TOTAL
AMOUNT DUE
$2,976.431
26.58%
$4,757.69
, 42.:49%
.$3,462,971
30.93%
_ $11,197.09
ASSOCIATED COSTS ON ORIGINAL AND SEALED BID SALES
:•
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF'
:' COURT'%
CONSTABLE/PUBLICATI
ADIITEM
RESEARCH FEE &
TO BE PRORATED TO
BID
COST
` ON FEE (TISD)
FEE'
DEED RECORDING FEE
TAXES:
$4,500.00
$781:00
$175.00'--
$750.00
$250.00
$2,544.00'
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO -EACH JURISDICTION
OWED TO
COUNTY
%
SCHOOL
%
CITY
'/o
TOTAL
PRORATED.
AMOUNT
$676.25
26.58% .
$1,080.96
42.490
$786:79
1'30.93'%'
$2,544.00
Amount of Bid:
$4,500.00
Costs:.
-District Clerk.
..: $731.00.
-Tax Master :."
$50.00 Chris Stacy-
.
.-Constable nstable Fee
p
$0.00
:Publication
;.. $1.75.00:
"
t.:.
-AbstracFee
:. .$250.00 . ,
-Cost
$0.00..
-Ad Litem Fee
$750:00 Samantha Yolanda Davis
Total:; $2,544.00
Taxing-..
Jurisdictions:
Amount in -Judgment: % ..
. Amount Received
: City of La Porte
$3,462.97: :30.93%.....
$786..79 ..., .. ..
La Porte.ISD.
, :--' -$4,7.57:69 42.49%.,
Harris County
-':,$2,562.86 = 22.89% :
$582.29
San Jacinto CCD :. :
• :. $413:57. :.: : '3:69'.
:.. .:.$93.96 '.:..::.•; . ... :.:.:
State of Texas ..
. ;
: $0.00 0.00% ..
, .
$0.00
$11,197.09 100.00%
$2,544.00
Costs + Taxes.-
$13,153.09 :
..
_
Adjudged Value
$ 6,000.00 -
P200
Munn
®®®®'
®®®vvo,t
,
B/70
OMMARY
OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY'.
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
023-197-066-0009.:. •.: Property Struck off for:
Value'. '
• CAUSE NO:
2001-65458 .:::.
PLAINTIFF(S):
Cityof La Porte & La Porte Independent School District
JUDGMENT AGAINST: -.
Johnny'Joe Evans & Heirs"".
JUDGMENT DATE:: ..
.. May 28, 2002 STRUCK OFF (DATE: ;." , _
March 4; 2003. '
ORDER OF SALE: ' . :
November 26; 2002.
DEED RECORDED DATE:
May 9, 2003 : STRUCK OFF. TO:.,:
City of La Porte `
CONSTABLE:..
Bill Bailey, Constable Precint No 8 ..
PROPERTY ADDRESS:...
210 North Sixth Street
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lots % 10 & 1.1 Block 66 La Porte .
ADJUDGED VALUE IN. JUDGMENT):".... $ 7,500:00 ..
'
SQUARE FOOTAGE:.. ,
: :.:.9,375
-
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY '..
BIDDER:` . Clenell. Carter
:. BIDDER'S ADDRESS:.
3865 Pecan Circle:. .
AMOUNT OF BID:
...:.-.$6,400.00_ :..:. > .. ;. = ..La
Porte, TX77571.-
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT:..
' - $640.00
AMOUNT DUE:
$5,760.00 . - BIDDER'S PHONE NO:.
281-470=6734 .. -
PRORATFD PFRCFNTAGFD OF TAXES DUE TO EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT'-:,
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
AL:
%
SCHOOL:'
- W
CITY'
%
TOTAL .
AMOUNT DUE
. $3,011.12
. 26.68%1
K168,58
-: '45.80%
$3;104.45
27.51%
$11,284.15
ASSOCIATED COSTS ONORIGINAL AND SEALED BID SALES
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF
COURT'
'CONSTABLE%PUBLICATI
AD LITEM
RESEARCH FEE & '
TO BE PRORATED TO
BID'
..COST
ON FEE (TISD)
FEE- "
DEED RECORDING FEE
- TAXES'
$6,400.00
•..$0.00
$175.00
$0.00
$250.00
$5,975:00'
PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION : '-
OWED TO ..
COUNTY
% '
SCHOOL•1"
%
CITY
%
TOTAL
:.
PRORATED.
....
AMOUNT' $1,594.40"
26.68%
$2,736.78
45.80%
$1,643.82.• 27.51% $5,975.00 '
Amount of Bid:
.$6,400.00
.
Costs:
-District Clerk
.: " : -$0.00..
=
-Tax Master
.:.. -Constable Fee. :. .. :.. $0.00
-Publication
$1.75.00
-Abstract Fee
:... $250.00
-Cost
$0.00.
' ...-Ad Litem Fee :
:. $0.00..
:.
Total: $5,975.00:
.
Taxing.:
Jurisdictions:
Amount in Judgment:
%
Amount Received'.
City of La Porte :
$3,104.45
27.51°h .
". $1.;643.82 .
La Porte ISD
:. $5,168.58 . ..
`45.80%
... $2,736.78
Harris County '
$2,591..04 -
22.96% :
$1,371.97'
'-San Jacinto-CCD :. '. .:.
:°:.... - . $420.08
3.72%.
.:.., .-$222,43-
State of Texas, .' :
$0.00
0:00%
$0:00
$11,284.15 . ..
-100.00% ..
. $5,975.00
Costs + Taxes $11;709.15
Adjudged Value. $.:, 7,500:00
P201 • ., :
_
i
•
B/80
IMARY •
OF FORECLOSURE ACTIVITY •
HCAD ACCOUNT NO:
023-1.97-066-0034 .° Property Struck off for:
Value .
CAUSE NO::
2001-65458
PLAINTIFF(S):-
City of La Porte & La Porte Independent School District
JUDGMENT AGAINST:
Johnny Joe Evans & Heirs ,
JUDGMENT DATE:
May 28, 2002 :: ` . STRUCK OFF DATE:- :
March 4, 2003
ORDER OF.SALE:
-November 26, 2002 ,
DEED RECORDED DATE:
May 9, 2003 STRUCK OFF TO:
City of La Porte
CONSTABLE:.
Bill Bailey, Constable Precint No 8
PROPERTY ADDRESS':
209 North Fifth Street
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lots 21 & 22 Block 66 La Porte
ADJUDGED VALUE (IN JUDGMENT): $ 5;000.00
SQUARE. FOOTAGE:
, 6,250
SUMMARY OF SALE ACTIVITY
BIDDER: Clenell Carter
BIDDER'S ADDRESS:
3865 Pecan Circle . .
AMOUNT OF - BID: -
$4,500.00
La Porte, TX 77571,
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT: •
$450.00
AMOUNT DUE:
14,050.00.... .. : : ' BIDDER'S PHONE NO: :
281-470-6734.: '
PRORATED PERCENTAGED OF TAXES DUE TO EACH JURISDICTION BASED UPON JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT TO
COUNTY, ET
AL'.
%
SCHOOL.
CITY
% -
� TOTAL _
AMOUNT DUE
$2,242.59
'13.29%
' $11,38-1.40
67..46%1.
$3,247.78
19.25%
.$16,871:77
..
' •. ' .
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
AMOUNT OF
� COURT
CONSTABLE/PUBLICATI
AD LITEM
RESEARCH FEE &
TO.BE PRORATED TO
BID
'COST
': ON FEE.(TISD)
FEE
DEED RECORDING FEE
• -TAXES '
$4,500.00
$0.00
$175:00
$0.00
$250.00
$4,075.00
- •' .PRORATED TAX AMOUNTS TO EACH JURISDICTION
OWED TO'
COUNTY
%
SCHOOL-1
CITY
6/6
TOTAL •
PRORATED
AMOUNT:
.. $541.65 � '
13.29%•
$2,748.92.
67.46%
:$784.43
19.25%
•
$4,075.00
' Amount of Bid: �
• � �
� �� ' $4.;500:00. ��
� �
� � � � � � •
Costs:
District Clerk
$0.00
. �. • . �
-Tax Master �
... • ` . $0.00
�
.... .
-Constable Fee.
.. - $0.00...
•..:• • :..
� .. .. ... � ..
-Publication
$17500
�.
. ••
-Abstract Fee
$250:00 :
�. _
_ •: � � � . .
.
-Cost
$0.00
.. �
_Ad Litem�Fee
.$0.00
. _' . .. � . :. .. '
� . ..�. ,. • • �
Total:.. $4,075..00. ,
• � � Taxing` �
� �
� ..
:.
� � • . � :.. �:
Jurisdictions:'
Amount'in Judgment:
% :
Amount Received
. City of La Porte
,•.. -
$3,247.78•
� 19.25%
$784.43 ... � .. � •
•. � . La Porte ISD •
�• � �
� � . $1.4,381.40 ' .�• � : ,
� 67:46%...
$2,748:92 � • • - � �� . •
• Harris County
� , • � :. �
,: $1,909.08:. • . ..
�-. 11.32% �•
� $461.10
San Jacinto CCD1
$333.51 � � ..
1.98% �•:.
.' $80.55.: �: • _. � .: -. � • .
• �� State of Texas.
•,�,:�
'$0.00 � '• � �
0.00°/u :
$0.00
:' ....
:. ;• : ; .:..
$16,871.:77100.00%.
$4,075.00 ... ..
Costs +Taxes.•
f $17,296.77
.. .. .: . �.
�
� � � .. � • • .. , _ � .. � �...
Adjudged Value
$ 5,000.00.' . `
.� • -� •• � � ::P202
Munn
Bunn
0
0
5.
CITY OF LA PORTE
Interoffice Memorandum
TO: Bang Beasley, Councilman
Howard Ebow, Councilman
Chuck Engelken, Councilman
Peter Griffiths, Councilman
Debra Brooks Feazelle, City Manager
FROM: Cynthia Alexander, Assistant City M ager
Shelley Wolny, Investment OfficeK7U)
DATE: January 17, 2005
SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report
For the first quarter of the 2005 fiscal year, the City's investment portfolio yield has been between 2.14%
and 2.45%. The average return on the portfolio for the first quarter of the fiscal year was 2.33%, which is
8 basis point above the average yield of our benchmark, which was 2.22% (see graph below). The current
year to date interest earned for the 2005 fiscal year is $163,088.
City vs. Benchmark
3.00%
2.50%
2.00%
1.50%
1.00% `
of �s� Voa,Ao`
Portfolio Yield Benchmark
At December 31"' the City's portfolio consisted of 52% in Agency Notes, 25% in Texpool, 10% in
TexSTAR and 13% in Logic (see pie chart below).
52%
By Investment Type
25%
10%
13%
0 Texpool E TexSTAR 13Logic 13Agency Notes
Over the past few months, the Fed has raised the overnight target rate several times, which has caused
yields to slowly rise on the short end. Our main focus is to continue to ladder the portfolio.
• i
At the end of the first quarter, the City's portfolio consisted of 47% of the portfolio maturing overnight
(see graph below). 10% of the City's portfolio matures in one year and 43% of the City's portfolio
matures in 12-24 months.
By Investment Maturity
43% 1 47%
10%
Overnight N 1-12 Months E3 12-24 Months
Currently, the 3-month T-Bill is at 2.22%; 2 year, at 3.01%; 5 year, at 3.60%; and, the 20-year is at 4.88%
(see yield curve below).
Yield Curve
5.50%
4.50%
3.50%
2.50%
1.50%
0.50%
0 5 10 15 20
3 Months Ago —Current
The overnight rate is currently at 2.25%. We will continue to focus on laddering the portfolio to maintain
a constant cash flow and a liquid position.
2 Year T-Note
12.00%
10.00%
s.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00%
19` SO 0' CP old' C)" CO 0 6' Off' Qk
In summary, we will continue to invest the City's funds in conservative investments, as authorized by the
Public Funds Investment Act, always keeping in mind Safety first, and then Liquidity and lastly Yield.
2
•
0
Portfolio Composition and Value
as of December 31, 2004
100.00%
80.00%
Par
Book
Market Days to
Value
Value
Value Maturity
60.00%
Investment Pools
14,346,958
14,346,958
14,346,958 1
Agencies
15,992,472
15,982,472
15,916,900 459
40.00%
Total
30,329,430
30,329,430
30,263.858 242
20.00%
0.00%
Investment Pools Agencies
47.30% 52.70%
®Dec-04 1.3un-04-*-Dec-03
Investment Maturity Schedule
as of December 31, 2004
Book
Value
Percent
1.2 years
0-3 months
14,346,958
47.30%
9-12 months
2,996,618
9.88%
1-2 years
12,985,854
42.82%
9-12
2 or more years
-
0.009A
moot
"Moab
Total
30�3294�30
100.00%
Portfolio Performance
for the mouth of December 2004
Weighted
2.90%
Portfolio
Benchmark
Average
2.49%
Yield
Yield*
Maturity
2.07%
Pooled Funds
2.45%
2.50%
9.26 months
Bond Funds
2.07%
2.22%
1 day
1.66%
1.24%
Total
2.26%
236%
6.24 months
0.83%
0.41%
*Thelled funds benchmark is based on the
a Semonth)Y yield
ofa 6-month Treasury. '•
0.00%
Pooled Funds Bond Funds Total
The bond fiords benchmark yield is based on the average monthly yield of a 3-month Treasury.
The total is based on weighted average monthly benchmark yields.
13 PonfWio Yiek1 ■ Benchmark Yield•
Portfolio Earnings
for months ended December 31, 2004
250,000
Budget
Actual
Percent
200.000
General
236,410
38,373
16.23%
Enterprise
41,540
5,437
13.09%
150,000
a
Internal Service
64,200
16,936
26.22%
100.00D00
Total
342,150
o
60,646
17.73%
50,0
General Enterprise Internal Service
OBudget ■Actual
Yield Curve
4.00%
350%
3.00%
2.50%
2.00%
1.50%
1.07%
0.50%
0.00%
3 mo 6 mo t 1T 2yr Syr
tOet-04-b-Nov04-Ig-De00t
Average for December
% of funds invested in:
2004
2003
Securities & Pools
95.96%
97.79%
Bank Depository
4.04%
2.21%
Total % of funds invested
100.00%
100.00%
Operating Accotint Balance
f 1,278,446 S
799,969
0
0
Monthly Summary Report of Cash Management for December 2004
L Purchases and Associated Interest Rates
2. Calculation of Purchasing Effectiveness
START
END
INVESTMENT
DAYS
INVESTMENT
DAYS
RATIO OF
ADJ
6 MONTH
ADJ
TYPE
DATE
DATE
COST
RATE
HELD
COST
* COST
TOTAL
RATE
RATE
T-BILL
T-BILL
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
2,000,000.00
3.080%
31
2,000,000.00
62,000,000.00
7.124%
3.080%
0.219%
2.400%
0.171%
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
2,000,000.00
3.050%
31
2,000,000.00
62,000,000.00
7.124%
3.050%
0.217%
2.400%
0.171%
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
2,000,000.00
3.020%
31
2,000,000.00
62,000,000.00
7.124%
3.020%
0.215%
2.400%
0.171%
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
998,652.61
3.000%
31
998,652.61
30,958,230.91
3.557%
3.000%
0.107%
2.400%
0.085%
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
996,959.55
2.680%
31
996,959.55
30,905,746.05
3.551%
2.680%
0.095%
2.400%
0.085%
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
1,000,000.00
2.640%
31
1,000,000.00
31,000,000.00
3.562%
2.640%
0.094%
2.400%
0.085%
AGY *
12
13
04
12
31
04
11997,986.39
2.625%
18
1,997,986.39
35,963,755.02
4.133%
2.625%
0.108%
2.500%
0.103%-
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
998,631.46
2.500%
31
998,631.46
30,957,575.26
3.557%
2.500%
0.089%
2.400%
0.0850/C
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
2,000,000.00
2.435%
31
2,000,000.00
62,000,000.00
7.124%
2.435%
0.173%
2.400%
0.171%�
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
990,241.94
2.375%
31
990,241.94
30,697,500.14
3.527%
2.375%
0.084%
2.400%
0.085%
AGY *
12
1
04
12
31
04
1,000,000.00
2.300%
31
1,000,000.00
31,000,000.00
3.562%
2.300%
0.082%
2.400%
0.085%
TEXSTAR
12
1
04
12
31
04
3,034,601.09
2.067%
30
3,034,601.09
91,038,032.70
10.461%
2.067%
0.216%
2.400%
0.251%
TEXSTAR
12
31
04
12
31
04
3,039,934.23
2.191%
1
3,039,934.23
3,039,934.23
0.349%
2.191%
0.008%
2.590%
0.009%
TEXPOOL
12
1
04
12
9
04
6,197,583.84
1.943%
8
6,197,583.84
49,580,670.72
5.697%
1.943%
0.111%
2.400%
0.137%
TEXPOOL
12
9
04
12
10
04
5,897,583.84
1.982%
1
5,897,583.84
5,897,583.84
0.678%
1.982%
0.013%
2.420%
0.016%
TEXPOOL
12
10
04
12
13
04
6,129,358.60
1.998%
3
6,129,358.60
18,388,075.80
2.113%
1.998%
0.042%
2.440%
0.052%
TEXPOOL
12
13
04
12
21
04
3,929,358.60
2.107%
8
3,929,358.60
31,434,868.80
3.612%
2.107%
0.076%
2.500%
0.090%
TEXPOOL
12
21
04
12
31
04
7,429,358.60
2.157%
10
7,429,358.60
74,293,586.00
8.537%
2.157%
0.184%
2.540%
0.217%
TEXPOOL
12
31
04
12
31
04
7,439,973.23
2.178%
1
7,439,973.23
7,439,973.23
0.855%
2.178%
0.019%
2.590%
0.022%
LOGIC
12
1
04
12
31
04
3,860,056.86
2.130%
30
3,860,056.86
115,801,705.80
13.306%
2.130%
0.283%
2.400%
0.319%
LOGIC
12
31
04
12
31
04
3,867,050.31
2.237%
1
3,867,050.31
. 3,867,050.31
.0.444%
2.237%
0.010%
2.590%
0.012%
2.42%
TOTALS
66,807,331.15
TOTALS
66,807,331.15
870,264,288.81
100.000/0
2.45%
T-BILL = U.S. TREASURY BILL; T-NOTE = U.S. TREASURY NOTE; T-BOND = U.S. TREASURY BOND; CMO = COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIGATION; TEXPOOL = TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT
2
Monthly Summary Report of Cash Management, Continued
3. Comparison to Performance Indicator 7. Diversification of Investments
2 Year T-Bill
This Months Adjusted Rate 2.45%
- Measurement Rate 2.42% A. By Investment Type
+/- Adjustment for Past Performance History 0.03%
= Performance Rate for the Month (Basis Points) 0.00%
This Months Performance Rate Applied Logic
to Interest Earned Formula to arrive 13%
at Impact for the Month (127.87)
Agency Not
52%
4. Effectiveness to Date (Since October 1, 2004) Texpool
25%
Interest: TexSTAR
Summation Through Beginning of Month 3,070.12 100/0
+/- impact of Investment Purchases (127.87)
Summation Through End of Month 2,942.25
Gain (Loss) on Investments:
Summation Through Beginning of Month 0.00 B. By Stated Maturity
+/- impact of Investment Purchases 0.00
Summation Through End of Month 0.00
12-24 Months
Total Impact Through End of Month 2,942.25 d10/
I Interest Earnings to Date
Interest Earned this Month plus Gain or (Loss) 58,339
Total budgeted 620,030 1-12 Months
Interest Earned Year to Date 1639088 1000 Overnight
Yet to be earned 456,942 47%
Percentage Earned 26.30%
6. Market Value and Weighted Average Maturity Summary
Beginning Book Value
Beginning Market Value
Ending Book Value
Ending Market Value
29,373,740.81
29,317,311.79
30,329,429.72
30,263,857.77
Beginning Weighted Average Maturity (Mths)
Ending Weighted Average Maturity (Mths)
Change in Market Value from Prior Month
Unrealized Gain/(Loss) on Portfolio
Net Asset Value
9.9
9.3
(8,170.00)
(65,571.95)
99.8%
•
TOTAL RETURN CALCULATION REPORT
FOR DECEMBER A 31 DAY MONTH
PURCHASE
MATURITY
DAYS
INVESTMENT INTEREST
INTEREST
DAYS
DATE
DATE
HELD
COST RATE
EARNED
COST
10/19/04
10/19/06
31
2,000,000.00
3.080%
5,231.78
62,000,000.00
09/29/04
09/29/06
31
2,000,000.00
3.050%
5,180.82
62,000,000.00
09/08/04
09/08/06
31
2,000,000.00
3.020%
5,129.86
62,000,000.00
11/15/04
11/15/06
31
998,652.61
3.000%
2,544.51
30,958,230.91
07/08/04
06/29/06
31
996,959.55
2.680%
2,269.24
30,905,746.05
05/26/04
05/26/06
31
1,000,000.00
2.640%
2,242.19
31,000,000.00
12/13/04
12/15/05
18
1,997,986.39
2.625%
2,586.43
35,963,755.02
11/16/04
12/15/05
31
998,631.46
2.500%
2,120.38
30,957,575.26
04/28/04
04/28/06
31
2,000,000.00
2.435%
4,136.16
62,000,000.00
07/02/04
08/15/06
31
990,241.94
2.375%
1,997.44
30,697,500.14
01/20/04
01/20/06
31
1,000,000.00
2.300%
1,953.42
31,000,000.00
12/01/04
12/31/04
30
3,034,601.09
2.067%
5,154.75
91,038,032.70
12/31/04
12/31/04
1
3,039,934.23
2.191%
182.48
3,039,934.23
12/01/04
12/09/04
8
6,197,583.84
1.943%
2,639.32
49,580,670.72
12/09/04
12/10/04
1
5,897,583.84
1.982%
320.23
5,897,583.84
12/10/04
12/13/04
3
6,129,358.60
1.998%
1,006.76
18,388,075.80
12/13/04
12/21/04
8
3,929,358.60
2.107%
1,814.18
31,434,868.80
12/21/04
12/31/04
10
7,429,358.60
2.157%
4,391.06
74,293,586.00
12/31/04
12/31/04
1
7,439,973.23
2.178%
443.95
7,439,973.23
12/01/04
12/31/04
30
3,860,056.86
2.130%
6,756.79
115,801,705.80
12/31/04
12/31/04
1
3,867,050.31
2.237%
237.00
3,867,050.31
TOTALS:
INTEREST EARNED
58,338.78
870,264,288.81
GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT ACTIVITY
0.00
686,892.09
TOTAL RETURN
58,338.78
28,073,041.57
TOTAL RETURN ON AVERAGE DAILY INVESTED BALANCE
2.45%
•
INVENTORY REPORT
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO AT DECEMBER 31.2004
PURCHASE
MATURITY
INTEREST
BEGINNING
BEGINNING
ENDING
ENDING
CHANGEIN
MONTHS TO
INVESTMENT
ACCRUED FUND
TYPE
DATE
DATE
RATE
BOOK VALUE
MARKET VALUE
BOOK VALUE
MARKET VALUE
MARKET VALUE
MATURITY
PARITACE
INTEREST
AGENCIES
FHLB
10/19/04
10/19/06
3.080%
2,000,000.00
1,995,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,994,380.00
(620.00)
22
2,000,000.00
5,133.33 POOLED
FHLB
09/29/04
09/29/06
3.050%
2,000,000.00
1,9959000.00
2,000,000.00
1,994,380.00
(620.00)
21
2,000,000.00
5,083.33 POOLED
FHLB
09/08/04
09/08/06
3.020%
2,000,000.00
1,994,380.00
2,000,000.00
1,994,380.00
0.00
20
2,000,000.00
5,033.33 POOLED
FHLB
11/15/04
11/15/06
3.000%
998,591.55
995,940.00
998,652.61
995,940.00
0.00
22
1,000,000.00
2,500.00 POOLED
FNMA
07/08/04
06/29/06
2.680%
996,786.61
993,750.00
996,959.55
993,440.00
(310.00)
18
1,000,000.00
2,233.33 POOLED
FHLB
05/26/04
05/26/06
2.640°/o
1,000,000.00
993,750.00
1,000,000.00
993,130.00
(620.00)
17
1,000,000.00
2,200.00 POOLED
FFCB
12/13/04
12/15/05
2.625%
1,997,880.00
1,997,880.00
1,997,986.39
1,993,120.00
(4,760.00)
11
2,000,000.00
2,333.33 POOLED
FHLB
11/16/04
12/15/05
2.500%
998,509.90
995,940.00
998,631.46
995,630.00
(310.00)
11
1,000,000.00
1,111.11 POOLED
FHLB
04/28/04
04/28/06
2.435%
2,000,000.00
1,983,120.00
2,000,000.00
1,982,500.00
(620.00)
16
2,000,000.00
4,058.33 POOLED
FHLB
07/02/04
08/15/06
2.375%
989,730.96
987,500.00
990,241.94
987,500.00
0.00
19
1,000,000.00
1,979.17 POOLED
FNMA
01/20/04
01/20/06
2.300%
1,000,000.00
992,810.00
1,000,000.00
992,500.00
(310.00)
13
1,000,000.00
1,916.67 POOLED
15,981,499.02
15,925,070.00
15,982,471.95
15,916,900.00
8,170.00
16,000000.00
33,581.93
POOLS
TEXPOOL
12/31/04
2.069%
6,497,583.84
6,497,583.84
7,439,973.23
7,439,973.23
0.00
0
7,439,973.23
POOLED
TEXSTAR
12/31/04
2.071%
3,034,601.09
3,034,601.09
3,039,934.23
3,039,934.23
0.00
0
3,039,934.23
POOLED
LOGIC
12/31/04
2.133%
3,860,056.86
3,860,056.86
3,867,050.31
3,867,050.31
0.00
0
3,867,050.31
POOLED
13,392,241.79
13 392,241.79
14,346,957.77
14,346,957.77
0.00
14 346,957.77
0.00
TOTAL:
29,373,740.81
29,317,311.79
30,329,429.72
30,263,857.77
(8,170.00)
9
30,346,957.77
33,581.93
PORTFOLIO DETAIL TRANSACTION REPORT
FOR PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2004
PURCHASES
TYPE
PAR
COUPON
YIELD
MATURITY
PRICE
PRINCIPAL
PREM/(DISC)
ACCRUED
TOTAL
FUND
FFCB
SALES
2,000,000.00
2.625%
2.625%
12/15/05
99.8941
1,997,882.54
2,117.46
25,958.33
2,023,840.87
POOLED
TYPE
PAR
COUPON
YIELD
MATURITY
PRICE
PRINCIPAL
PREM/(DISC)
ACCRUED
TOTAL
FUND
CALLED
TYPE
PAR
COUPON
YIELD
MATURITY
PRICE
PRINCIPAL
PREM/(DISC)
ACCRUED
TOTAL
FUND
MATURED
TYPE
PAR
COUPON
YIELD
MATURITY
PRICE
PRINCIPAL
PREM/(DISC)
ACCRUED
TOTAL
FUND
40
•
Portfolio Yield vs Benchmark
U
Additional Earnings
0
Investment Maturity
& Cashflow
(excluding Texpool & Logic)
4,000,000.00
•
3,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,000,000.00
oh Oh oh Oh oh O� db db db OHO db OHO O^ o^ o^ o^ O^ O^
SO 14�1 40 ��. 41 moo,. S4o 40 40 ��, CO �o�, �� 41 40 %-->
10,000 -
(10,000)
(20,000)
(30,000)
(40,000)
(50,000)
(60,000)
(70,000)
AGENCIES
Market Gain (Loss)
by Month
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
724
(56,429)
(65,572)
10
40
Monthly Portfolio Division
❑ 12% ❑ 19%
❑ 13%
111iiiiiii
■ 56%
❑ First SW ■ Coastal Securities ❑ Southwest Securities ❑ Duncan Williams
Average Return on Investments
3.00%
2.00%
1.00%
0.00%
First SW Coastal Southwest Duncan
❑Average Yields 2.87% 2.66% 2.63% 2.69%
11
•
,•
December 31, 2004
This report is in full compliance with the investment strategy as
established for the pooled investment fund and the Public Funds
Investment Act (Chanter 2256).
ij0/ • .
Cyn lexander Michael olby
Assistant ity Manager Assistant Finance Director
gd&�Jmiil
Shelley WolnyU
Investment Officer
12
C�
6.
City of LaPorte, Texas
Investment Policy
Adopted by the City;Council
/ �Of%the City of Ia Pbrte`
O\
On January 13,1992, by C�
Ordinance No.1802:
Amended November`1995N it
?� \Amended — August 1997' K!
ende/d. .November 2000` i
ended.'- February, 2003 "
City of La Porte, Texas
Cynthia B. Alexander
Director of Finance
Shelley Wolny
Investment Officer
I. POLICY
It is the policy of the City of La Porte, Texas (the "City") to administer and invest its funds in a
manner which will preserve the principal and maintain the liquidity through limitations and
diversification while meeting the daily cash flow requirements of the City. The City will invest all
available funds in conformance to all ..t ,t..te. geva g the esit.«e.,t .,r dhe City's fi « :.
ineludinRf W4 not by way ef «f the f tff ,
Gove1-- me«t Coe (the " A eV) with legal and administrative guidelines, seeking to optimize
interest earnings to the maximum extent possible.
II. PURPOSE
The purpose of this investment policy is to comply with all statutes governing the investment of
the City's funds and Chapter 2256 of the Government Code ("Public Funds Investment Act'),
which requires the City to adopt a written investment policy regarding the investment of its funds
and funds under its control. The Investment Policy addresses the methods, procedures and
practices that must be exercised to ensure effective and judicious fiscal management of the City's
funds.
III. SCOPE
The City will strive to earn a return on funds invested at the highest investment return possible
after taking in consideration the primary goals of preservation of principal and liquidity of funds
invested, consistent with the policy objectives described below. This investment policy applies to
the investment activities of the government of the City of LaPorte, Texas.
FUNDS INCLUDED All financial assets of all funds managed by the City, including but not
limited to receipts of Tax Revenues, Charges for Services, Bond Proceeds, Interest Incomes,
Loans and Funds received by the City where the City performs a custodial function.
IV. OBJECTIVES
SAFETY The primary objective of the City's investment activity is the preservation of capital in
the overall portfolio. Each investment transaction shall seek first to ensure that capital losses are
avoided, whether they are from securities defaults or erosion of market value. The City will
strive to minimize credit risk by limiting investments to the safest types of investments,
prequalifying the financial institutions and broker/dealers with which the City conducts business,
and diversify the investment portfolio so that potential losses on individual issuers will be
minimized. To minimize interest rate risk, the City will ladder the portfolio and match
investments with future cash requirements and invest operating funds in shorter, more liquid
securities and investments.
LIQUIDITY The City's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to
meet operating requirements that might be reasonably anticipated. Liquidity shall be achieved by
matching investment maturities with forecasted cash flow requirements and by investing in
securities with active secondary markets. Because all possible cash demands cannot be
anticipated, a portion of the portfolio will be invested in shares of money market mutual funds or
local government investment pools that offer same day liquidity.
RIP%X-Q9 I Q99 PUBLIC TRUST All participants in the investment process shall seek to act
responsibly as custodians of the public trust. Investment Officials shall avoid any transaction that
0 •
might impair public confidence in the City's ability to govern effectively. The governing body
recognizes that in a diversified portfolio, occasional measured losses due to market volatility are
inevitable, and must be considered within the context of the overall portfolio's investment return,
provided that adequate diversification has been implemented.
YIELD (Optimization of Interest Earnings The City's cash management portfolio shall be
designed with the objective of regularly meeting or exceeding the average rate of return on the
fl,&ee-me k U.S. Treasury Bills at a maturity level comparable to the City's weighted average
maturity in days. The investment program shall seek to augment returns above this threshold
consistent with risk limitations identified herein and prudent investment principles.
V. OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITY
Oversight Responsibility for the investment activity of the City of La Porte shall rest with the
wit Fiscal Affairs Committee and the City Manager.
VI. RESPONSIBILITY AND CONTROL
DELEGATION Management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated to
the Director of Finance, who shall establish written procedures for the operation of the investment
program, consistent with this investment policy. Such procedures shall include explicit delegation
of authority to persons responsible for investment transactions.
SUBORDINATES All persons involved in investment activities will be referred to as
"Investment Offieials Officers." No person shall engage in an investment transaction except as
provided under the terms of this policy and the procedures established by the Director of Finance.
The Director of Finance shall be responsible for all transactions undertaken, and shall establish a
system of controls to regulate the activities of Subordinate Investment O'f€sials Officers.
QUARTERLY REPORTS The Director of Finance shall submit quarterly an investment report
that summarizes recent market conditions, economic developments and anticipated investment
conditions. The report shall summarize the investment strategies employed in the most recent
quarter and describe the portfolio in terms of investment securities, maturities, risk
characteristics, book values, market values and other features. The report shall explain the
quarter's total investment return and compare the return to budgetary expectations. The report
shall include an appendix that discloses all transactions during the quarter.
ANNUAL REPORTS Within 90 days of the end of the fiscal year, the Director of Finance shall
present a comprehensive annual report on the investment program and investment activity. The
annual report shall include twelve-month and quarterly comparison of returns, and shall suggest
improvements that might be made in the investment program.
PRUDENCE Investments shall be made with the exercise of due care, which persons of
prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for
speculation but for investment considering the probable safety of their own capital as well as the
probable income to be derived. Investment Of€ieials Officers acting in accordance with written
procedures and this investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal
responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations
from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and the liquidity and the sale of securities are
carried out in accordance with the terms of this policy.
3
IlVIDEMNIFICATION The Investment Officer, acting in accordance with written procedures
and exercising due diligence, shall not be held personally responsible for a specific investment's
credit risk or market price changes, provided that these deviations are reported immediately and
the appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.
ETHICS DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Af€richs Officers and employees
involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict
with proper execution and management of the investment program, or which could impair their
ability to make impartial investment decisions. Employees and Investment Offisials Officers
shall disclose to the City Manager any material finansial interests in financial institutions that
conduct business with the City of La Porte, and shall further disclose any large personal financial
or investment positions that could be related to the performance of the City's investment portfolio.
Employees and Investment Of sials Officers shall
sales refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual with
which business is conducted on behalf of the City of La Porte.
An Investment Officer of the City of La Porte who has a personal business relationship with an
organization seeking to sell an investment to the City of La Porte shall file a statement disclosing
that personal business interest. An Investment Officer who is related within the second degree by
affinity or consanguinity to an individual seeking to sell an investment to the City of La Porte
shall file a statement disclosing that relationship. A statement required under subsection
2256.005(i) of the PFIA must be filed with the Texas Ethics Commission and the governing body
of the City of LaPorte.
TRAINING Investment Officers shall attend at least one investment training session within 12
months after taking office or assuming duties, and shall attend an investment training session not
less than once in a two-year period and receive not less than 10 hours of instruction relating to
investment responsibilities from an independent source approved by the ae& Fiscal Affairs
Committee. For the purposes of this policy, an "independent source" is defined as a professional
organization, an institute of higher learning or any other sponsor other than a Business
Organization with whom the City may engage in investment transactions. Independent sources
that may provide investment training include the Government Treasurer's Organization of Texas,
the University of North Texas, the Government Finance Officers Association of Texas, or the
Texas Municipal League. Training shall be in accordance with the Public Funds Investment Act
and shall include education in investment controls, security risks, market risks, and compliance
with statutes governing the investment of public funds.
VII. E'gWSTMiENTS
ACTIVE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT The City intends to pursue active versus passive
portfolio management philosophy. That is, securities may be sold before they mature if market
conditions present an opportunity for the City to benefit from the trade.
E r�fl AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS Assets of funds of the government of the City of
La Porte may be invested in the following as authorized by the Public Funds Investment Act:
A. Obligations of, or Guaranteed by Governmental Entities
1. Except as provided by Subsection 2 (b), the following are authorized investments under
this section:
a) obligations of the United States or its agencies and instrumentalities;
b) direct obligations of this state or its agencies and instrumentalities;
c) collateralized mortgage obligations directly issued by a federal agency or
instrumentality of the United States, the underlying security for which is guaranteed
by an agency or instrumentality of the United States;
d) other obligations, the principal and interest of which are unconditionally guaranteed
or insured by, or backed by the full faith and credit of, this state or the United States
or their respective agencies and instrumentalities; and
e) obligations of states, agencies, counties, cities, and other political subdivisions of any
state rated as to investment quality by a nationally recognized investment rating firm
not less than A or its equivalent.
2. The following are not authorized investments under this section:
a) obligations whose payment represents the coupon payment on the outstanding
principal balance of the underlying mortgage -backed security collateral and pays not
principal (Interest only bonded);
b) obligations whose payment represents the principal stream of cash from the
underlying mortgage -backed security collateral and pays no interest (Principal only
bonds);
c) collateralized mortgage obligations that have a final stated maturity date of greater
that 10 years; and
d) collateralized mortgage obligations, the interest rate of which is determined by an
index that adjusts opposite to the changes in a market index.
B. Certificates of Deposit and Share Certificates
A certificate of deposit is an authorized investment under this Subchapter if the
certificate is issued by a state or national bank domiciled in this state, a savings bank
domiciled in this state, or a state or federal credit union domiciled in this state and is:
a) guaranteed or insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or its successor
or the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund or its successor;
b) secured by obligations that are described by Subsection 2256.009 (a), including
mortgage backed securities directly issued by a federal agency or instrumentality that
have a market value of not less than the principal amount of the certificates, but
excluding those mortgage backed securities of the nature described by Subsection
2256.009 (b); or
c) secured in any other manner and amount provided by law for deposits of the
investing entity.
C. Repurchase Agreements
1. A fully collateralized repurchase agreement is an authorized investment under this
Subsection if the repurchase agreement:
a) has a defined termination date;
b) is secured by obligations described by Subsection 2256.009 (a)(1); and
c) requires the securities being purchased by the entity to be pledged to the entity, held
in the entity's name, and deposited at the time the investment is made with the entity
or with a third party selected and approved by the entity; and
d) is placed through a primary government securities dealer, as defined by the Federal
Reserve, or a financial institution doing business in this state.
e) repurchase agreements and reverse repurchase agreements shall be entered into only
with dealers who have executed a Master Repurchase Agreement with the City.
2. In this section, "repurchase agreement" means a simultaneous agreement to buy, hold for
a specified time, and sell back at a future date obligations described by Subsection A,
l,a), at a market value at the time the funds are disbursed of not less than the principal
amount of the funds disbursed. The term includes a direct security repurchase agreement
and a reverse security repurchase agreement.
3. Notwithstanding any other law, the term of any reverse security repurchase agreement
may not exceed 90 days after the date the reverse security repurchase agreement is
delivered.
4. Money received by an entity under the terms of a reverse security repurchase agreement
shall be used to acquire additional authorized investments, but the term of the authorized
investments acquired must mature no later than the expiration date stated in the reverse
security repurchase agreement.
D. Banker's Acceptances
1. A banker's acceptance is an authorized investment under this subchapter if the banker's
acceptance:
a) has a stated maturity of 270 days or fewer from the date of its issuance;
b) will be, in accordance with its terms, liquidated in full at maturity;
c) is eligible for collateral for borrowing from a Federal Reserve Bank; and
d) is accepted by a bank organized and existing under the laws of the United States or
any state, if the short-term obligations of the bank, or of a bank holding company of
which the bank is the largest subsidiary, are rated not less that A-1 or P-1 or an
equivalent rating by at least one nationally recognized credit rating agency.
E. Commercial Paper
1. Commercial paper is an authorized investment under this subchapter if the commercial
paper;
a) has a stated maturity of 270 days or fewer from the date of its issuance; and
b) is rated not less than A-1 or P-1 or an equivalent rating by at least;
c) two nationally recognized credit rating agencies; or
d) one nationally recognized credit rating agency and is fully secured by an irrevocable
letter of credit issued by a bank organized and existing under the laws of the United
States or any state.
F. Mutual Funds
1. A no-load money market mutual fund is an authorized investment under this subchapter
if the mutual fund:
a) is registered with and regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission;
b) provides the investing entity with a prospectus and other information required by the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. Section 80a-1 et seq.);
c) has a dollar -weighted average stated maturity of 90 days or fewer; and
d) includes in its investment objectives the maintenance of a stable net asset value of $1
for each share.
2. In addition to a no-load money market mutual fund permitted as an authorized investment
in Subsection 4� (a), a no-load mutual fund is an authorized investment under this Section
if the mutual fund:
a) is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission;
b) has an average weighted maturity of less than two years;
c) is invested exclusively in obligations approved by this subchapter;
d) is continuously rated as to investment quality by at least one nationally recognized
investment rating firm of not less than AAA or it equivalent; and
e) conforms to the requirements set forth in Sections r'v, 2 and 3 2256.016 (b) and (c)
relating to the eligibility of investment pools to receive and invest funds of investing
entities.
3. An entity is not authorized by this section to:
;
b) invest in the aggregate more than 15 percent of its monthly average fund balance,
excluding bond proceeds and reserves in other funds held for debt service, in mutual
funds described in Subsection 2 (b);
c) invest any portion of bond proceeds, reserves and funds held for debt service, in
mutual funds described in Subsection -2; (b); or
d) invest its funds or funds under its control, including bond proceeds and reserves and
other funds held for debt service, in any one mutual fund described in 9-3b6e6tlen. I EW
2 Subsection (a) or (b) in an amount that exceeds 10 percent of the total assets of the
mutual fund.
G. Investment Pools
1. An entity may invest its funds and funds under its control through an eligible investment
pool if the governing body of the entity by rule, order, ordinance, or resolution, as
appropriate, authorizes investment in the particular pool. An investment pool shall invest
the funds it receives from entities in authorized investments permitted by this subchapter.
2. To be eligible to receive funds from and invest funds on behalf of an entity under this
chapter, an investment officer or other authorized representative of the entity an offering
circular or other similar disclosure instrument that contains, at a minimum, the following
information:
a) the types of investments in which money is allowed to be invested;
b) the maximum average dollar -weighted maturity allowed, based on the stated maturity
date, of the pool;
c) the maximum stated maturity date any investment security within the portfolio has;
d) the objectives of the pool;
e) the size of the pool;
f) the names of the members of the advisory board of the pool and the dates their terms
expire;
g) the custodian bank that will safekeep the pool's assets;
h) whether the intent of the pool is to maintain a net asset value of one dollar and the
risk of market price fluctuation;
i) whether the only source of payment is the assets of the pool at market value or
whether there is a secondary source of payment, such as insurance or guarantees, and
a description of the secondary source of payment;
j) the name and address of the independent auditor of the pool;
k) the requirements to be satisfied for an entity to deposit funds in and withdraw funds
from the pool and any deadlines or other operating policies required for the entity to
invest funds in and withdraw funds from the pool; and
1) the performance history of the pool, including yield average dollar -weighted
maturities, and expense ratios.
3. To maintain eligibility to receive funds from and invest funds on behalf of an entity under
this chapter, an investment pool must furnish to the investment officer or other
authorized representative of the entity:
a) investment transaction confirmations; and
b) a monthly report that contains, at a minimum, the following information:
i. the types and percentage breakdown of securities in which the pool is invested;
ii. the current average dollar -weighted maturity, based on the stated maturity date,
of the pool;
iii. the current percentage of the pool's portfolio in investments that have stated
maturities of more than one year;
iv. the book value versus the market value of the pool's portfolio, using the
amortized cost valuation;
V. the size of the pool;
vi. the number of participants in the pool;
vii. the custodian bank that is safekeeping the assets of the pool;
viii. a listing of daily transaction activity of the entity participating in the pool;
ix. the yield and expense ratio of the pool;
X. the portfolio managers of the pool; and
xi. any changes or addenda to the offering circular.
4. An entity by contract may delegate to an investment pool the authority to hold legal title
as custodian of investments purchased with its local funds.
5. In this section, "yield" shall be calculated in accordance with regulations governing the
registration of open-end management investment companies under the Investment
Company Act of 1940, as promulgated from time to time by the Federal Securities and
Exchange Commission.
6. To be eligible to receive funds from and invest funds on behalf of an entity under this
chapter, a public funds investment pool created to function as a money market mutual
fund must mark its portfolio to market daily, and, to the extent reasonably possible,
stabilize a $1 net asset value. If the ratio of the market value of the portfolio divided by
the book value of the portfolio is less than 0.995 or greater than 1.005, portfolio holdings
shall be sold as necessary to maintain the ratio between 0.995 and 1.005.
.11
7. To be eligible to receive funds from and invest funds on behalf of an entity under this
chapter, a public funds investment pool must have an advisory board composed:
a) equally of participants in the pool and other persons who do not have a business
relationship with the pool and are qualified to advise the pool, for a public funds
investment pool created under Chapter 791 and managed by a state agency; or
b) of participants in the pool and other persons who do not have a business relationship
with the pool and are qualified to advise the pool, for other investment pools.
8. To maintain eligibility to receive funds from and invest funds on behalf of an entity under
this chapter, an investment pool must be continuously rated no lower that AAA or AAA -
in or at an equivalent rating by at least one nationally recognized rating service.
EXISTING INVESTMENTS Any investments currently held that do not meet the guidelines of
this policy shall be reviewed to determine the ability to liquidate. If the investment cannot be
liquidated because of material adverse change in the value since the time of purchase, and holding
the investment to maturity does not negatively affect disbursements or cash flow, a
recommendation of holding said investment to maturity is acceptable.
PROCUREMENT Investments of subsections A-G of this section, exeluding now issues, may be
made only after competitive bids are solicited from at least three sources, with the exception of a)
transactions with money market mutual funds and local government investment pools, and b)
treasury and agency securities purchased at issue through an approved broker/dealer or financial
institution.
MONITORING The market value of each investment shall be obtained monthly from a source
such as the Wall Street Journal newspaper, a reputable brokerage firm or security pricing service
and reported on the monthly investment reports.
LENGTH OF INVESTMENTS The maximum stated maturity, from the date of purchase, for
any individual investment may not exceed 5 years and the maximum dollar -weighted average
maturity for the pooled fund group (investment portfolio) may not exceed 2 years.
DIVERSIFICATION It is the policy of the City of La Porte to diversify its investment portfolios.
Assets held in the common investment portfolio shall be diversified to eliminate the risk of loss
resulting from one concentration of assets in a specific maturity, a specific issuer or a specific
class of securities. Diversification strategies shall be determined and revised periodically by the
A it Fiscal Affairs Committee.
In establishing specific diversification strategies, the following general policies and constraints
shall apply:
A. Portfolio maturities shall be staggered in a way that protects interest income from the
volatility of interest rates and that avoids undue concentration of assets in a specific maturity
sector. Securities shall be selected which provide for stability of income and reasonable
liquidity. The City shall continually invest a portion of the portfolio in readily available
funds such as local government investment pools (LGIPs), money market funds or overnight
repurchase agreements to ensure that appropriate liquidity is maintained in order to meet
ongoing obligations.
10
B. The Atmh Fiscal Affairs Committee shall establish strategies and guidelines for the
percentage of the total portfolio that may be invested in securities other than repurchase
agreements, Treasury bill and notes, or insured and collateralized certificates of deposits.
The Audit Fiscal Affairs Committee shall conduct a semi-annual review of these guidelines,
and shall evaluate the probability of market and default risk in various investment sectors as
part of its considerations.
VIII. SELECTION OF BANKS AND DEALERS
BIDDING PROCESS Depositories shall be selected through the City's banking services
procurement process, which shall include a formal request for proposal (RFP) issued every two
(2) three (3) years. In selecting depositories, the credit worthiness of institutions shall be
considered, and the Director of Finance shall conduct a comprehensive review of prospective
depositories credit characteristics and financial history.
INSURABILITY Banks and Savings & Loans Associations seeking to establish eligibility for
the City's competitive certificate of deposit purchase program, shall submit financial statements,
evidence of Federal insurance and other information as required by the Director of Finance.
PRIMARY DEALERS AND APPROVED LIST For brokers and dealers of government
securities, Investment Officers shall select only those dealers reporting to the Market Reports
Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, also known as "primary government
securities dealers," unless a comprehensive credit and capitalization analysis reveals that other
firms are adequately financed to conduct public business. Before engaging in investment
transactions with a broker/dealer, the Investment Officer shall have received, from a Qualified
Representative of said firm, a signed Certification Form. (Exhibit B) This form shall attest that
the individual responsible for the City's account with that firm hasCity's
the Gity and the bfekemge (1) received and reviewed the investment policy of the entity;
and (2) acknowledged that the business organization has implemented reasonable procedures and
controls in an effort to preclude investment transactions conducted between the entity and the
organization that are not authorized by the entity's investment policy, except to the extent that this
authorization is dependent on an analysis of the makeup of the entity's entire portfolio or requires
an interpretation of subjective investment standards. Investment Officers of the City may not
acquire or otherwise obtain any authorized investment described in the investment policy from a
person who has not delivered a signed Certification Form. The au& Fiscal Affairs Committee
shall at least annually review, revise, and adopt a list of qualified brokers that are authorized to
engage in investment transactions with the City. (Exhibit A)
IX. SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY
INSURANCE OR COLLATERAL All bank deposits, certificates of deposit, and repurchase
agreements shall be secured by pledged collateral. Bank deposits and certificates of deposit shall
be collateralized with a market value equal to no less than 102% of the deposits plus accrued
interest less than an amount insured by FDIC. Repurchase agreements shall be monitored daily.
Evidence of the pledged collateral shall be maintained by the Director of Finance or a third party
financial institution. Repurchase agreements shall be documented by specific agreement noting
the collateral pledged in each agreement. Collateral shall be reviewed monthly to assure the
market value of the securities pledged equals or exceeds the related bank balances.
11
SAFEKEEPING AGREEMENT All safekeeping arrangements shall be in accordance with a
Safekeeping Agreement approved by the Audis Fiscal Affairs Committee which clearly defines
the procedural steps for gaining access to the collateral should the City of La Porte determine that
the City's funds are in jeopardy. The safekeeping institution, or Trustee, shall be the Federal
Reserve Bank or an institution not affiliated with the firm pledging the collateral. The
safekeeping agreement shall include the signatures of the City of La Porte, the firm pledging the
collateral, and the Trustee.
COLLATERAL DEFINED The City of La Porte shall accept only the following securities as
collateral:
A. FDIC insurance coverage;
B. United States Treasuries and Agencies;
C. Texas State, City, County, School or Road District bonds with a remaining maturity of ten
(10) years or less with rating from a nationally recognized investment rating firm and having
received a rating of not less than A or its equivalent;
D. Other securities as approved by the Audi Fiscal Affairs Committee.
SUBJECT TO AUDIT All collateral shall be subject to inspection and audit by the Director of
Finance or the City's independent auditors.
DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT '
seeur-ities All investment transactions, with the exception of local government investment pools
and mutual fund transactions, shall be purchased using the delivery versus payment method. That
is, funds shall not be wired or paid until verification has been made that the collateral was
received by the Trustee. The collateral shall be held in the name of the City or held on behalf of
the City. The Trustee's records shall assure the notation of the City's ownership of or explicit
claim on the securities. The original copy of all safekeeping receipts shall be delivered to the
City.
X. MANAGEMENT AND INTERNAL CONTROLS
The Director of Finance shall establish a system of internal controls, which shall be reviewed by
an independent auditor. The controls shall be designed to prevent losses of public funds arising
from fraud, employee error, misrepresentation by third parties, unanticipated changes in financial
markets, or imprudent actions by employees or Investment Officers of the City.
Controls and managerial emphasis deemed most important that shall be employed where practical
are:
A. Control of collusion.
B. Separation of duties.
C. Separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping.
D. Custodian safekeeping receipts records management.
12
• 0
E. Avoidance of beam physical delivery securities.
F. Clear delegation of authority.
G. Documentation on investment bidding events.
H. Written conformation of telephone transactions.
I. Reconcilement and comparisons of security receipts with the investment subsidiary records.
J. Compliance with investment policies.
K. Accurate and timely reports.
L. Validation of investment maturity decisions with supporting cash flow data.
M. Adequate training and development of Investment Officers.
N. Verification of all interest income and security purchase as sell computations.
O. Review of financial condition of all brokers, dealers and depository institutions.
P. Staying informed about market conditions, changes, and trends that require adjustments in
investment strategies.
COMPLIANCE AUDIT The City of La Porte shall perform, in conjunction with its annual
financial audit, a compliance audit of management controls on investments and adherence to the
entity's established investment policies. The audit shall include a formal review of the quarterly
investment reports by an independent auditor and the results reported to the governing body by
the independent auditor. Also, the governing body shall review its investment policy and
investment strategy not less than annually and adopt a written instrument by rule, order,
ordinance, or resolution stating that it has reviewed the investment policy and strategy, and
recorded any changes made to them.
13
0
•
Exhibit A
City of La Porte
Approved List of Brokers/Dealers and Investment Pools
Brokers/Dealers
Coastal Securities
First Southwest Company
Duncan Williams, Inc.
Southwest Securities, Inc.
Investment Pools
TexPool
LOGIC Investment Pool
TexSTAR
i
•
Exhibit B
BROKER/DEALER CERTIFICATION FORM
As required by Texas Government Code 2256.005 (k-1)
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
This certification is executed on behalf of (the Investor)
and (the Dealer) pursuant to the Public Funds
Investment Act, Chapter 2256, Government Code, Texas Codes Annotated (the Act) in
connection with investment transactions conducted between the Investor and Dealer.
The Undersigned Qualified Representative of the Dealer hereby certifies on behalf of the
Dealer that:
The Dealer Qualified Representative is duly authorized to execute this
Certification on behalf of the Dealer, and
2. The Dealer Qualified Representative has received and reviewed the Investment
Policy furnished by the Investor, and
3. The Dealer has implemented reasonable procedures and controls in an effort to
preclude investment transactions conducted between the Dealer and the Investor
that are not authorized by the entity's investment policy, except to the extent that
this authorization is dependent on an analysis of the makeup of the entity's entire
portfolio or requires an interpretation of subjective investment standards.
Dealer Qualified Representative
Signature
Name (Printed):
Title:
Date:
0
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Investment Strategy Statement
Exhibit C
The City of La Porte, Texas (the "City") will strive to administer and invest its pooled
funds at the highest investment return possible while always taking into account the
primary goals of preservation of principal and liquidity of funds invested consistent with
the City's investment policy.
The City's funds, which are pooled together and constitute the investment portfolio,
include all financial assets of all funds managed by the City, including but not limited to
receipts of tax revenues, charges for services, bond proceeds, interest incomes, loans and
funds received by the City where the City performs a custodial function.
The City will never invest its funds in a security that is deemed unsuitable to the financial
requirements of the City. Maturities will be staggered in a manner that meets the cash
flow needs of the City.
The primary investment objective is the preservation and safety of principal. Each
investment transaction shall seek first to ensure that principal losses are avoided, whether
they are from security defaults or erosion of market value.
The City's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet
operating requirements that might be reasonably anticipated. Liquidity shall be achieved
by matching investment maturities with forecasted cash flow requirements and by
investing in securities with active secondary markets.
The City shall always maintain a highly diversified investment portfolio in order to
reduce the amount of credit and market risk exposed to the City's portfolio.
After first considering safety and liquidity, the City's investment portfolio shall be
designed with the objective of regularly exceeding the average rate of return on U.S.
Treasury Bills at a maturity level comparable to the City's weighted average maturity in
days. The City shall seek to augment returns above this threshold consistent with risk
limitations identified in the City's investment policy and prudent investment principles.
•
•
70
City of La Porte, Texas
Quarterly Report of Credit Card Expenditures
First Quarter FY 2006
Report of Credit Card Expenditures
Quarter Ending December 31, 2004
Check
Payee Date Number Amount
Elan Financial Services
11/04/04
213714
850.68
Elan Financial Services
12/10/04
214619
170.98
Elan Financial Services
01/07/04
215254
750.09
$ 1,771.75
Amount
Debra Feazelle, City Manager
1,143.34
John Joerns, Assistant City Manager
250.00
Cynthia Alexander, Assistant City Manager
1,340.81
Martha Gillett, City Secretary
(1,023.40)
Richard Reff, Police Chief
61.00
Total Expenditures $
1,771.75
NOTE: This report reflects all PAYMENTS made during the First Quarter of FY 2005 (October, November, December 2004)
•
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Quarterly Report of Credit
Card Expenditures
First Quarter FY 2005
Cardholder Position: City
Manager
Expense
Payee
Date Amount
Type
Purpose
The Innovation Groups
09/22/04
44.00
Registration for Luncheon Innovation Groups Program
Debra Feazelle
Ernie's Restaurant
09/27/04
42.47
Lunch
Discuss a possible Fall Festival
Debra Feazelle, Stephen Barr, Jayo Washington
Monument Inn Restaurant
09/29/04
185.51
Lunch
Bond Presentation
D. Feazelle, B. Beasley, J. Joerns, C. Alexander
Drew Masterson, Moody's Reps.,
Standards & Poors
Greater Houston Partners
10/01/04
40.00
Registration
Greater Houston Partnership Meeting
Intersontinental Houston Hotel
Debra Feazelle - Houston, TX
PBD*ICMA Publications
10/25/04
335.57
Educational Material
A Guide for Elected & Appointed Official
Debra Feazelle
Antonios Grill & Pizza
10/25/04
50.18
Lunch
Employee of the Quarter Lunch
D. Feazelle, Sherry Jennings, D. Wilmore, W. Sabo •
Greater Houston Partners
10/29/04
40.00
Registration
Greater Houston Partnership Luncheon
Debra Feazelle - George R. Brown Convention Ctr
Urban Land Institute
11/03/04
75.95
Educational Material
Urban Land Institute
Debra Feazelle
Paypal*Small Cities
11/11/04
35.00
Educational Material
Small Cities Publishing
Debra Feazelle
Monument Inn
11/22/04
90.16
Lunch
Employee of the Quarter
D. Feazelle, J. Joerns, C. Alexander, M. Dolby &
Lee Ann Williams
City of La Porte, Texas
Quarterly Report of Credit Card Expenditures
First Quarter FY 2006
Cardholder Position: City Manager
Expense
Payee
Date
Amount
Type
Purpose
PBD*ICMA Publications
12/09/04
54.50
Educational Material
Effective Local Government
Debra Feazelle
Texas Municipal League
12/10/04
95.00
Registration
Legislative Briefing
Debra Feazelle - Austin, TX
Greater Houston Partners
12/14/04
55.00
Registration
Greater Houston Partnership Meeting
Debra Feazelle - Hilton Americas - Houston, TX
Total Quarterly Charges
$
1,143.34
Check #
213714
214619
215254
NOTE: This report reflects all PAYMENTS made during the First Quarter of FY 2005 (October, November, December 2004)
•
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Quarterly Report of Credit Card Expenditures
First Quarter FY 2005
Cardholder Position: Assistant City Manager, John Joerns
Expense
Payee Date Amount Type Purpose
Amer Soc of Civil Engineer 10/14/04 250.00 Monthly Charges Membership Renewal
John Joerns
Check #
Total Quarterly Charges $ 250.00 213714
NOTE: This report reflects all PAYMENTS made during the First Quarter of FY 2005 (October, November, December 2004)
City of La Porte, Texas
Quarterly Report of Credit Card Expenditures
First Quarter FY 2005
Cardholder Position: Assistant City Manager, Cynthia Alexander
Expense
Payee
Date
Amount
Type
Purpose
Southwest Airlines
09/21/04
152.70
Travel
TML Annual Conference
Cynthia Alexander - Corpus Christi, TX
Texas Municipal League
09/28/04
250.00
Registration
GFOAT Fall Conference 2004
Cynthia Alexander - Galveston, TX
Texas Municipal League
09/28/04
210.00
Registration
GFOAT Fall Conference 2004
Michael Dolby - Galveston, TX
Dollar RAC
10/29/04
17.18
Airport Parking
TML 92nd Annual Conference
Cynthia Alexander - Corpus Christi, TX
Ramada Inn Bayfront Hotel
10/29/04
102.35
Lodging
TML 92nd Annual Conference
Cynthia Alexander - Corpus Christi, TX
Moody Gardens Hotel
11/19/04
289.90
Lodging
GFOAT-Fall Conference
Cynthia Alexander - Galveston, TX
Southwest Airlines
12/02/04
203.70
Travel
TCMA-William "King: Cole Series
Cynthia Alexander - Austin, TX •
Dollar RAC
12/03/04
5.73
Airport Parking
TCMA-William "King: Cole Series
Cynthia Alexander - Austin, TX
Double Tree Hotel
12/03/04
109.25
Lodging
TCMA-William "King: Cole Series
Cynthia Alexander - Austin, TX
Check #
Total Quarterly Charges
$
1,340.81
213714
214619
215254
NOTE: This report reflects all PAYMENTS made during the First Quarter of FY 2005 (October, November, December 2004)
City of La Porte, Texas
Quarterly Report of Credit Card Expenditures
First Quarter FY 2005
Cardholder Position: City Secretary
Expense
Payee Date Amount Type
Texas Municipal League 09/24/04 (205.00) Credit
Texas Municipal League 09/22/04 (180.00) Credit
Ramada Inns Bayfront
10/28/04
102.35
Lodging
National League of Cities
11/11/04
(380.00)
Credit
National League of Cities
11/11/04
(380.00)
Credit
National League of Cities
11/11/04
(380.00)
Credit
Continental Airlines
11/11/04
271.20
Travel
Continental Airlines
11/10/04
271.20
Travel
Continental Airlines 11/11/04 5.00 Travel
Security Service Fee
Continental Airlines 11/11/04 5.00 Travel
Security Service Fee
National League of Cities 11/22/04 (380.00) Credit
Purpose
TML Conference - September 2004
Councilman Moser - Austin, TX
TML Conference - October 2004
Councilman Rigby - Corpus Christi, TX
TML Conference
Mayor Porter - Corpus Christi, TX
NLC Conference
Councilman Ebow - Indianapolis, IN
NLC Conference
Mayor Malone - Indianapolis, IN
NLC Conference
Councilman Engelken - Indianapolis, IN
NLC Conference
Councilman Mosteit - Indianapolis, IN
NLC Conference
Councilman Beasley - Indianapolis, IN
NLC Conference
Councilman Mosteit - Indianapolis, IN
NLC Conference
Councilman Beasley - Indianapolis, IN
NLC Conference - 2004 Congress of Cities
Councilman Griffith - Washington, DC
0
•
City of La Porte, Texas
Quarterly Report of Credit Card Expenditures
First Quarter FY 2005
Cardholder Position: City Secretary
Expense
Payee
Date
Amount
Type
National League of Cities
11/22/04
(380.00)
Credit
National League of Cities
11/22/04
(295.00)
Credit
National League of Cities
11/22/04
(295.00)
Credit
Westin Hotels
12/02/04
649.60
Lodging
Westin Hotels
12/02/04
649.60
Lodging
Ramada Inns Bayfront
12/07/04
(102.35)
Lodging
Purpose
NLC Conference - 2004 Congress of Cities
Councilman Meismer - Washington, DC
NLC Conference - 2004 Congress of Cities
Councilman Moser - Washington, DC
NLC Conference
Councilman Rigby - Indianapolis, IN
NLC Conference
Councilman Mosteit - Indianapolis, IN
NLC - 2004 Congress of Cities
Councilman Beasley - Indianapolis, IN
TML Conference
Mayor Porter - Corpus Christi, TX
Check #
Total Quarterly Charges $ (1,023.40) 213714
214619
215254
NOTE: This report reflects all PAYMENTS made during the First Quarter of FY 2005 (October, November, December 2004)
0
0
City of La Porte, Texas
Quarterly Report of Credit Card Expenditures
First Quarter FY 2005
Cardholder Position: Police Chief
Expense
Payee Date Amount Type Purpose
Harris County Toll Road 10/05/04 61.00 EZ Tag Task Force & SOP Vehicles
0
•
Check #
Total Quarterly Charges $ 61.00 213714
NOTE: This report reflects all PAYMENTS made during the First Quarter of FY 2005 (October, November, December 2004)
December 31, 2004
This report is in full compliance with the credit card policy as
established by the City of La Porte's Audit Committee.
1)4�gva. J44
10igfiael Dolby, CPA
Assistant Finance Director
Green, Shannon
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 9:47 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: San Antonio: tax freeze support outweighs benefits
For fiscal affairs committee. c
Original Message
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 3:15 PM
Subject: San Antonio: tax freeze support outweighs benefits
Tax freeze support outweighs benefits
Web Posted: 011161200512:00 AM CST
Greg Jefferson
San Antonio Express -News
Voters across San Antonio and throughout Texas tripped over one another 16 months
ago to cast ballots for Proposition 13.
The amendment to the state Constitution gave cities, counties and junior college
districts the option to freeze property taxes for senior citizens and the disabled. And it
won emphatically, garnering 88 percent of the vote in Bexar County and 81 percent
statewide.
But its benefits in San Antonio wouldn't be as widespread as its support at the polls.
A tax freeze would deliver relief to many homeowners on the North Side —where
property values generally are higher _ but it would mean far less to the rest of San
Antonio, according to a city analysis.
In only four of the city's 10 council districts would more than half of elderly
homeowners get relief from Proposition 13.
At the same time, some local officials worry that a freeze would put more of the tax
burden on younger property owners and eventually could force cuts in city services or
higher fees.
The City Council will decide Thursday whether to place the measure on the May 7
ballot.
If voters settle the matter, they undoubtedly will have to do a gut check: If adopted, the
freeze can't be repealed — regardless of economic conditions —and it applies equally to
poor and wealthy homeowners.
"Our concerns are that it's permanent and it's not means -teed in any way, "said Frank
Sturzl, executive director of the Texas Municipal League. "If (billionaire) Red McCombs
lives within San Antonio's city limits, he would be eligible."
He said the freeze would shift the burden 'from those over 65, regardless of their ability
to pay, to younger property owners, regardless of their ability to pay."
Mayor Ed Garza said he wants voters to weigh in because of the sheer magnitude of
electoral support for the measure. But he won't vote for it if it gets on the ballot.
"If I had my way, based on its current language, I would vote against it because I don't
think it's targeted to people who need it most," Garza said. 'But we can't ignore that an
election took place, and it was overwhelmingly passed."
Meanwhile, the needs of many homeowners on fixed incomes are growing acute.
"Property values have been skyrocketing all across the city," Garza said. "There's a
definite concern in this community that property values, because of the growth of our
city, have far exceeded the income capacity, particularly of senior citizens. I hear it
from my neighbors. I hear it from my family."
San Antonio already has a homestead exemption for seniors that shields the first
$65,000 of a home's appraised value from taxation. It also has a new exemption for the
disabled covering $12,500 of their homes' value.
Citywide, senior citizens' home values average $83,500, according to the Bexar
Appraisal District.
Tax freeze vs. squeeze
Ismael and Maria Hernandez, who live on West Mulberry Avenue near downtown in a
modest white house with light green trim, can attest to the difficulties retirees have
making ends meet. Their home's appraised value climbed to $67,500 from $65,086 two
years ago.
The couple, who moved into the house with four kids in 1965, receive San Antonio's
exemption for seniors, meaning they pay almost nothing in property taxes to the city.
But the county and school district taxes they pay do take a significant bite.
"The $500 we pay is still a lot," 74 year -old Ismael Hernandez said as he folded a string
of Christmas lights on his front porch recently. "If I don't have to pay any more, that's
good."
The county provides its own $50,000 exemption for senior homeowners, and they receive
a state -mandated cap on property taxes dedicated to school districts.
With a tax freeze, a tax bill wouldn't go above what the homeowner paid the year the
taxing entity adopted the measure. But if the tax rate drops, so would the tax bill.
0 •
If a strong majority of San Antonio voters approve a freeze, County Judge Nelson Wolff
said, the county probably would put it on the books as well. That's because about 85
percent of county residents live in San Antonio.
But Wolff hopes it doesn't come to that. His major objection is that wealthy property
owners would be treated the same as those with meager incomes.
A split Commissioners Court in November put off a decision on the tax freeze to ask the
state Legislature to consider a "clean-up" amendment adding a means test and
removing the measure's permanency. But Wolff doesn't hold much hope for a legislative
fix.
"I never have been very confident of this," Wolff said, "but we thought we'd give it a
run."
Property taxes are by far the county's biggest source of funds. For San Antonio, property
taxes make up 24.7 percent of the city Is general fund, second only to revenue from City
Public Service.
Last summer, then -City Manager Terry Brechtel proposed an alternative to a tax freeze
that would have raised the city's exemption for seniors by $5,000 until 2011, when the
first $90,000 of a home's value would be blocked from taxation. The exemption for the
disabled would have gone up to $85,000 in 2011.
Backers say the so-called "stair -stepped" exemption plan would help owners of modest
homes without shielding rich homeowners, and it would mean less lost revenue to the
city. With the higher exemption seniors could, over several years, save more money than
with a tax freeze, according to an analysis in Business Express, a publication of the
San Antonio Express -News.
Currently, nearly half of the 67,754 homesteads receiving San Antonio's over-65
exemption pay no property taxes to the city, because they're worth $65,000 or less,
according to the Bexar Appraisal District.
Another 18,575 of those homes are valued at $65,000 to $100,000; 14,938 at $100,000 to
$250,000; 1,290 at $250,000 to $500,000; 203 at $500,000 to $1 million; and 15 at more
than $1 million.
Fanning political winds
Councilman Richard Perez, who represents the Southwest Side, warns of a stormy
election season if a tax freeze goes to voters in May, when the mayoral and council races
also will be on the ballot.
Looking across Districts 2 through 5 —sweeping from the East Side to the South Side
and over to the West Side —Perez sees little benefit from Proposition 13.
"The majority of our homes are less than $65,000,11Perez saicZ. "I think it could
potentially be pretty divisive."
Still, Homer Lear, speaker emeritus of the Texas Silver -Haired Legislature, a senior
activist group, believes voters again would back the tax freeze, even though its benefits
wouldn't be evenly spread around San Antonio.
"Yes, there might be some who get more tax benefit," Lear said. 'But when you look at it
across the board, it was overwhelmingly supported by voters. All this was hashed when
the Legislature debated this two years ago."
And he said voters understood the issue clearly.
"I think it was well -documented — a tax freeze is a tax freeze, "Lear said.
Many cities and counties surrounding San Antonio already have fallen in behind
Proposition 13: Bulverde, Boerne, Selma, Seguin, Schertz, Marion, Fredericksburg and
New Braunfels; and Comal, Gillespie and Guadalupe counties.
Across Texas, 76 government bodies have locked in property taxes, according to the
Silver -Haired Legislature's Web site. The largest city to adopt the freeze so far is Corpus
Christi, with a population of 277,454 —about one fifth the size of San Antonio.
There, a taxpayer group gathered enough signatures to force a vote on the measure in
November. The port city expects to lose $11.7 million over the next 10 years as a result.
"I think we're going to have to do one of two things — increase revenues or cut services,"
Assistant City Manager Oscar Martinez said. "We could absorb it, but for how long, I
don't know."
San Antonio would lose an estimated $64.5 million over 10 years under the tax freeze.
But as more baby boomers hit 65 and become eligible for the break, the tally is likely to
grow.
If Proposition 13 prevails at the polls, Budget Director Peter Zanoni foresees San
Antonio in the same belt -tightening mode as Corpus Christi —that is, if the council
here continues expanding services or revenue remains tight.
"It's something we can do,"Zanoni said. 'But we'd have to trim services or increase
(revenue) somewhere. Something would have to give."
San Antonio's main mayoral candidates — Councilmen Julian Castro and Carroll
Schubert and retired judge Phil Hardberger —are undaunted in their support.
Hardberger noted that the cost of Proposition 13 over its first 10 years —$64.5 million —
would represent less than 0.5 percent of the total of all city budgets in that period, even
if officeholders held spending steady.
And ongoing economic expansion and a major annexation in city's growing
southern sector would easily offset losses stemming from a tax freeze, said Castro,
whose Northwest Side district would be one of the bigger beneficiaries.
"It will provide relief for senior citizens and the disabled without hurting the budget in
the long run," Castro said. "I think we're on the brink of tremendous growth."
Nor does Schubert buy into fears that the measure would mean scaling back services.
"It is a small percentage of the overall budget," Schubert said of the lost revenue. "I
don't believe we'd need to make cuts. I certainly think we can find the money."
San Antonio's budgets have steadily increased, he said, and that indicates the city
could afford the freeze. Indeed, the city Is spending has jumped 31.4 percent to $1.5
billion since fiscal year 2001, despite a series of shortfalls that city budget -writers have
had to overcome.
Schubert's North Central district would see one of the biggest benefits. There, 93
percent of its senior citizens own homes worth more than $65,000, and the average value
of homes owned by seniors is $150,811 —the highest in San Antonio.
Charles Cottrell, a Southwestern Bell retiree, lives on Brandenburg Drive in Schubert's
district. He bought his three -bedroom house for $57,000 in 1972; it's now valued at
$111,820. The property tax increases Cottrell, 70, has seen haven't been dramatic, but
they have been steady, at about 3 percent per year.
Still, he considers a tax freeze unnecessary, given the tax breaks he already gets on the
property.
"You get an exemption on quite a few things," Cottrell said. "I feel like it's fair."
Freeze fast
The City Council could adopt the tax freeze on its own, without a referendum. But
officeholders have spent more than a year wrestling with it, and they still found
themselves split mostly along sectional lines in December last month when they delayed
the decision on putting the measure on the ballot.
Councilman Joel Williams said he'll vote against putting the tax freeze on the May 7
ballot, calling it bad policy to bind future councils to Proposition 18.
"I think that we have got a very, very politically charged issue," Williams said. 'When
you put Prop 13 in the same perspective as any major issue that comes before this
council, we need to be very careful with ordinances we create that are irreversible."
The measure, he noted, would have little effect in his East Side district, where only 28
percent of senior homeowners receiving the city exemption have homes worth more than
$65, 000.
J
Instead of a freeze, he favors Brechtel's plan to gradually expand the city's exemption,
the "stair -step" approach.
Hardberger said that alternative was a step in the right direction. But he noted that,
taking the long view, the differences in estimated revenue loss between the two plans
would be ' fairly minor."
He said he would support the freeze even though the amendment did not provide a
means test and it's irreversible.
"I intend to vote for it,"Hardberger said. "It's like a lot of other things in politics: You
have to take it all or nothing."
As the debate continues, tax freeze supporters are losing their patience.
"I don't know how many times we have to vote on it," Lear said. Putting it to a vote in
May, he said, "is kind of ludicrous because it's already been voted on."
Green, Shannon
From:
Alexander, Cynthia
Sent:
Thursday, January 13, 2005 8:47 AM
To:
Green, Shannon
Subject:
FW: Richardson: council talks projects, tax relief; members may be more open to new debt
and break for seniors
For fiscal affairs committee
Original Message
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 7.15 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Richardson: council talks projects, tax relief; members may be more open to
new debt and break for seniors
Council talks projects, tax relief
Members may be more open to new debt and break for seniors
08:44 PM CST on Wednesday, January 12, 2005
By WEND HUNDLEY/ The Dallas Morning News
After several years of belt -tightening, the City Council is discussing capital
improvement projects and economic relief for seniors.
No action has been taken, but the discussions come at a time when the council is
beginning to think about the 2005-06 budget. The possibility of issuing new debt for
bond projects suggests that members are ready to loosen their grip on the city's purse
strings.
The city has had to restrict spending and cut back on improvement projects to balance
the budget because property tax and sales tax revenues have been down.
"We've come through three or so years of economic challenges, "Assistant City Manager
Dan Johnson said. "While we're not at the end, it's a conducive time to restructure our
debt plan."
In 1997, voters approved four bond propositions totaling $78 million for parks, public
buildings, streets and sidewalks, drainage and other infrastructure improvements.
A total of $27 5 million of the $78 million authorized by voters remains as unsold debt.
At the council Is request, Mr. Johnson recently described three debt -restructuring
options. They could allow the city to proceed with plans that could provide up to $12
million for parks and more than $15 million for streets, alleys, drainage and other
improvements.
The council has also begun discussions about providing property tax relief for disabled
homeowners and those age 65 and older.
In the last legislative session, Texas lawmakers made it possible for cities to freeze
taxes for these residents.
While Richardson officials took no action on the optional cap last year, City Council
members wanted more information about its revenue implication for the next budget.
If the cap is approved this year, taxes would be frozen at 2005 levels. The cost to the city
in lost revenue would be about $190,000 in the 2006-07 budget, Mr. Johnson said.
Plano, Mesquite and Grand Prairie have adopted a tax cap for disabled homeowners
and seniors. Frisco and Allen have taken a different route to helping seniors by raising
the amount of the homestead exemption.
Council members recently discussed raising the city's $30,000 homestead exemption by
$10,000 for seniors.This month, Mayor Gary Slagel asked staff to compute the impact of
freezing property taxes and increasing the homestead exemption to $40,000.
About 10 percent of Richardson's 91,802 residents are 65 and older, according to the
2000 U.S. census. Since 1990, the city's median age has risen from 34 to 85.8.
Mr. Johnson will be coming back to the council with information about the long-range
fiscal impact of the tax cap.
0
Fw Galveston seniors seek freeze on property taxes
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 8:34 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: Galveston: seniors seek freeze on property taxes
For fiscal affairs committee
-----Original message -----
sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 8:05 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Galveston: seniors seek freeze on property taxes
Seniors seek freeze on property taxes
6y Carter Thompson
The Daily News
Published January 11, 2005
GALVESTON — Senior citizens on Monday continued their call for a freeze on their
property taxes, while county leaders worried about the long-term effects of granting
their request.
No action was taken. But County Tax Assessor -Collector Cheryl Johnson said she would
report back to the commissioners court with an estimate of how much revenue would be
lost to the county budget under a senior tax freeze.
Last year, Texas voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that
gives local governments the option to freeze property taxes paid by residents that
are at least 65 or disabled.
County leaders in June declined to enact it, saying a freeze could limit the
county's financial flexibility and seniors already were granted tax relief in the
form of a $60,000 exemption on their homes.
Jack Blankenship, a senior citizen who lives in Santa Fe, said tax increases —
whether passed down by the county government or the central appraisal district in
the form of higher property values — could force retirees on fixed incomes to sell
their homes.
"This would give some tax -bill relief to the people least able to pay constant
raises," he said of the proposed freeze.
Monday's discussion was put on the agenda by Commissioner Eddie Janek.
County leaders again seemed cool on granting the freeze, which could not later be
revoked. They seemed more inclined to increase the senior citizen tax exemption.
Janek, himself a senior citizen, said he supported some type of relief but did not
want to hurt the county government.
Ivan Arceneaux, Galveston County's representative on the Silver -Haired Legislature,
a senior advocacy group, said he would circulate petitions to compel the county to
enact the freeze.
Page 1
•
Fw Arlington columnist says before voting know the tax -freeze details
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 1:47 PM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: Arlington: columnist says before voting, know the
tax -freeze details
For fiscal affairs committee
-----original message -----
sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 8:05 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Arlington: columnist says before voting, know the tax -freeze details
Posted on Sun, Jan. 09, 2005
Before voting, know the tax -freeze details
By O.K. Carter
Star -Telegram Staff writer
with the Feb. 5 election approaching on whether to freeze city property taxes for
disabled homeowners or those 65 and older, some confusion has surfaced about who
gets what in the way of exemptions.
The thing to remember is this: Don't mistake the city property tax and the school
tax.
The state requires that school districts have a $15,000 homestead exemption for
every homeowner, plus an additional $10,000 exemption when that homeowner reaches
65. Also, school property taxes are frozen when the homeowner reaches 65.
So a 65-year-old with a home appraised at $100,000 pays school taxes on $75,000 of
that. Further, the dollar amount of the taxes cannot increase even if the property
tax rate increases or the valuation increases, or both.
where property taxes are concerned, cities are allowed but not required to make
exemptions. Arlington provides two, but they're not guaranteed to be permanent:
• A 20 percent exemption for all homeowners.
• An additional $60,000 for homeowners 65 or older or those who are disabled. And
no, a disabled 65-year-old cannot claim two exemptions.
Thus our senior citizen in his $100,000 home gets the 20 percent exemption, or
$20,000, plus the $60,000 exemption. He pays city property taxes on only the
remaining $20,000 in valuation -- $129.60 annually based on the current tax rate of
64.8 cents per $100 valuation.
This city tax rate is not frozen for the disabled or for 65-and-older homeowners.
Those who circulated the petition forcing the February election want it to be
frozen.
virtually every such tax freeze election conducted in Texas has passed easily.
Likely the same thing will happen in Arlington.
If so, expect a battle of wills and political nerve because the city is not required
to keep its two optional exemptions. The council could end both the 20 percent
exemption and the $60,000 exemption for seniors, and some council members have
threatened to do exactly that.
why? Because if the city maintains its average annual growth in assessed values, the
loss of property tax revenue because of the freeze will grow every year. Currently,
Page 1
LI
•
Fw Arlington columnist says before voting know the tax -freeze details
almost 19 percent of city households receive the $60,000 exemption, with the number
increasing steadily as the baby boomers mature.
By 2016, the damage would be $6.076 million lost annually, and the cumulative loss
would exceed $30 million. Those dollars would have to be made up either with higher
taxes on other residents or with diminished services.
Or the city could simply end or change the amount of the $60,000 exemption for
seniors, though with a proviso: in order to affect those already receiving the
$60,000 exemption, the change needs to be made before the next tax bill is levied in
September.
Those Feb. 5 voters, then, need to be alert to the consequences. Do they opt for the
freeze and take a chance, or do they stick with the $60,000 sure -thing exemption?
Once again, we learn an old truth: There's no such thing as a free lunch.
Page 2
C�
Green, Shannon
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 10:42 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: League City: council nixes tax break for seniors
For fiscal affairs committee. C
Original Message
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 200410:28 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: League City: council nixes tax break for seniors
Council nixes tax break for seniors
By Sarah Viren
The Galveston County Daily News
Published December 16, 2004
LEAGUE CITY — City Councilman Jim Nelson said he was disappointed that he didn't
get backing on a proposed property tax freeze for senior and disabled residents.
Nelson ran his election campaign this spring on promises to help seniors with
everything from taxes to transportation. He put the proposed freeze on Tuesday night's
city council agenda — but only Councilman Thomas Cones voted with him for the
measure, he said.
The city council directed staff members to consider other tax relief options for seniors,
though. As an alternative, Finance Director Monica Kohlenberg had suggested raising
tax exemptions for senior and disabled residents, saying that other cities had taken
that route.
Seniors in League City don't have to pay taxes on the first $45,000 worth of property
value for their homes. In a memo to the city council, Kohlenberg showed that it would
cost about $1.1 million by 2008 if exemptions were increased to $60,000, the exemption
level allowed by Galveston County.
Nelson said he would keep pushing for the freeze, which is permanent once passed by
the city council.
Last year, Texas residents overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that
gives cities the option to freeze property taxes paid by residents that are 65 or older or
disabled.
"We will try again next year," Nelson said. "We will keep trying until they do something
4 •
besides sit on their thumbs."
0
0
Fw League City council nixes tax break for seniors
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 10:42 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: League City: council nixes tax break for seniors
For fiscal affairs committee. C
---Original message -----
sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 10:28 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: League City: council nixes tax break for seniors
Council nixes tax break for seniors
Bg Sarah viren
The Galveston County Daily News
Published December 16, 2004
LEAGUE CITY — City Councilman Jim Nelson said he was disappointed that he didn't get
backing on a proposed property tax freeze for senior and disabled residents.
Nelson ran his election campaign this spring on promises to help seniors with
everything from taxes to transportation. He put the proposed freeze on Tuesday
night's city council agenda — but only Councilman Thomas Cones voted with him for
the measure, he said.
The city council directed staff members to consider other tax relief options for
seniors, though. As an alternative, Finance Director Monica Kohlenberg had suggested
raising tax exemptions for senior and disabled residents, saying that other cities
had taken that route.
Seniors in League City don't have to pay taxes on the first $45,000 worth of
property value for their homes. In a memo to the city council, Kohlenberg showed
that it would cost about $1.1 million by 2008 if exemptions were increased to
$60,000, the exemption level allowed by Galveston County.
Nelson said he would keep pushing for the freeze, which is permanent once passed by
the city council.
Last year, Texas residents overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that
gives cities the option to freeze property taxes paid by residents that are 65 or
older or disabled.
"we will try again next year," Nelson said. "we will keep trying until they do
something besides sit on their thumbs."
Page 1
Fw League City follows others in considering tax break
From: Alexander, Cynthia
sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 11:18 AM
To• Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: League City follows others in considering tax break
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---Original message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 9:06 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: League City follows others in considering tax break
City follows others in considering tax break
BY Sarah viren
The Galveston County Daily News
Published December 14, 2004
LEAGUE CITY — Campaigning for council this spring, Jim Nelson, 67, pledged to help
senior citizens in with everything from taxes to transportation.
Today the new councilman will get a chance to fulfill at least one of those campaign
promises.
Nelson is pushing for a property tax freeze for senior and disabled residents, an
option considered by many local cities and counties but passed by just a handful.
Dickinson and Santa Fe both voted to freeze senior taxes.
Last year, Texas residents overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that
gives cities the option to freeze property taxes paid by residents that are 65 or
older or disabled.
League City staff members are recommending against the freeze. Finance Director
Monica Kohlenberg said she instead supports increasing tax exemptions for seniors
and disabled residents. Those residents have $45,000 worth of exemptions, meaning
that only $55,000 of a $100,000 house is taxable.
Sugar Land recently raised its exemption level after scrapping plans for a senior
tax freeze.
One of the biggest arguments against the tax freeze is cost to the city. Many
seniors are survivinon a fixed income, though, and argue that they need a limit on
g
taxes to keep their homes and lifestyles.
According to financial projections, Nelson's proposed tax freeze would constitute
about $1.1 million in lost tax dollars by 2008. League City already is struggling
with a growing budget that some say will require higher tax rates in future years.
with just the current exemptions, League City will lose about $2.9 million in
potential property tax dollars, according to financial projections. If this
exemption is increased by $15,000 per homeowner, the city would see an additional
$1.1 million during the next four years. That is about the same as losses under a
tax freeze. The only difference is that the city council can vote to change
exemption levels — a freeze is permanent.
Galveston County offers $60,000 in exemptions for homes owned by senior citizens.
Mayor Jeff Harrison said he prefers the idea of increased exemptions. Nelson could
not be reached for comment Monday.
Projections show that League City's 65-and-older population will increase by 132
residents each year; the number of disabled residents should grow by 18 annually.
Page 1
n
•
Fw League City follows others in considering tax break
what: League city City Council meeting.
when: 6:30 p.m. today.
where: 200 W. walker St.
Page 2
•
•
Fw Allen council may okay tax break for seniors disabled
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 10:33 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: Allen: council may okay tax break for seniors, disabled
For Fiscal Affairs committee. c
---Original message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 8:45 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
subject: Allen: council may okay tax break for seniors, disabled
Council may OK tax break for Allen seniors, disabled
12:39 AM CST on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 By STELLA M. CHAVEZ / The Dallas Morning
News
The Allen City Council is expected tonight to increase the property tax exemption
for seniors and disabled residents by $5,000.
A proposal calls for amending the city's ordinance by raising the tax exemption for
property owners age 65 and older to $40,000. It also would increase the exemption
for disabled residents from to $20,000.
City staff would review the exemptions every two years and recommend adjustments if
necessary.
If approved, the changes would take effect jan. 1 and affect the tax bills mailed
next fall.
Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment last year that allows cities to
freeze property taxes for seniors and the disabled. Since then, several cities have
discussed the issue or implemented changes to provide tax relief.
Plano adopted a tax freeze for seniors and the disabled in May. Frisco raised its
tax exemption for seniors and the disabled from $10,000 to $30,000 in November.
Allen officials said they favored an exemption increase to freezing property taxes.
They estimate that the exemptions would reduce property tax revenues by $35,000 in
2006 and save senior and disabled homeowners $27.95 per year.
City Manager Peter vargas said the change would not significantly affect city
operations.
Page 1
•
FW San Antonio council delays senior tax freeze decision
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 12:11 PM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: San Antonio: council delays senior tax freeze decision
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---original Message-----
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 9:40 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
subject: San Antonio: council delays senior tax freeze decision
Council delays senior tax freeze decision web Posted: 12/10/2004 12:00 AM CST
Greg Jefferson
San Antonio Express -News
A torn City Council on Thursday scrapped plans to decide next week whether to put a
property tax freeze for senior citizens and the disabled on next May's ballot.
The council voted 6-4 to delay the decision until mid -January to allow time for more
analysis of the sweeping measure.
Members from districts with lower property valuations argued that the measure would
bring no relief to most of their elderly homeowners. Most already benefit from the
city s current homestead exemption.
"I'm very leery about movin forward with Proposition 13," Councilman Richard Perez
said. "I think the (current $65,000 exemption makes a lot more sense for my
district."
councilman Carroll Schubert acknowledged that some senior homeowners in his North
Side district would get relief that they wouldn't need. But he noted: "I think we
need to look at this from a citywide standpoint."
voters statewide overwhelmingly supported Proposition 13, an amendment to the state
Constitution, in an election 14 months ago.
Officials had estimated the measure would cost San Antonio $68 million over 10
years. But budget director Peter zanoni on Wednesday trimmed that projection to
$64.5 million, basing it on more up-to-date property valuation numbers.
Mayor Ed Garza and Councilman Chip Haass won support in early November for a vote on
whether to place the freeze on the May ballot.
But city officials struggled for months over the tax freeze because once it's
passed, it can't be repealed.
For some members, the struggle continued Thursday.
"under saner conditions," Councilman Joel Williams, "my colleagues would never
support a measure they couldn't repeal."
Councilman Julian Castro said he supports placing the measure on the May 7 ballot -
on which he and Schubert will be mayoral candidates. But he backed the one -month
delay put forth by Councilman Roger Flores "in the interest of analysis and thorough
decision -making."
councilman Enrique Barrera worried about a tax freeze's impact on the budget.
"One of the things we really need to be concerned about is the cost of running this
City," Barrera said.
Page 1
0
Fw San Antonio council delays senior tax freeze decision
In the meantime, frustration has built up among proponents such as Bob Martin,
president of the Homeowner -Taxpayer Association.
"we would ask that you go ahead and implement it tonight," Martin told council
members Thursday. "If you can't pass it, at least let 'em vote again."
Earlier Thursday, council members focussed on potential tax increases. They again
kicked around proposals for the May 7 ballot that would bank on sales tax increases.
city council will decide within weeks whether to ask voters for 1/8-cent per dollar
increase to buy property for linear parks and back improvements along the Salado and
Leon creeks and the Medina and San Antonio rivers.
The deadline for placing initiatives on the ballot is Feb. 17.
just last month, voters OK'd a 1/4-cent sales tax increase for transportation
improvements. That leaves San Antonio with a capacity to raise the tax another
quarter -cent; the city can't exceed 8.25 cents per dollar.
As it now stands, voters will decide whether to raise taxes 1/8-cent to continue
buying property or conservation guarantees over the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone.
Page 2
0 •
Fw Allen council favors tax break for seniors disabled
From: Alexander, Cynthia
sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 8:25 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: Allen: council favors tax break for seniors, disabled
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---original message -----
sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 2:54 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
subject: Allen: council favors tax break for seniors, disabled
Allen favors tax break for seniors, disabled
12:40 AM CST on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 By STELLA M. CHAVEZ / The Dallas
Morning News
ALLEN - Allen city officials want to give senior citizens a break.
on Tuesday, the Allen City Council directed staff members to prepare an ordinance
that would raise the tax exemption $5,000 for homeowners who are age 65 and older or
disabled.
The council would review the issue every two years and consider the possibility of
raising the exemption by an additional $5,000.
In fall 2002, the city doubled its exemption for seniors to $30,000 and created a
$15,000 exemption for disabled residents.
In general, council members agreed that senior citizens should receive additional
relief, but they differed on whether they should increase the tax exemption every
two years or -impose a cap when the exemption reaches a certain level.
City Manager Peter Vargas explained that increasing the tax exemption is a better
alternative to freezing taxes because once a city freezes the taxes on a particular
group, it cannot rescind the action.
He also cited uncertainty about school financing and other state tax issues as
reasons to favor a tax exemption over a freeze.
"we don't know what's going to happen to the whole property -tax arena," he said.
Proposing to change the tax exemption for seniors and disabled residents "was more
appropriate until we know what the impact will be," he said.
If approved before the end of this year, the measure will take effect Jan. 1 and
affect the fiscal 2006 budget and tax bills mailed next fall.
under the proposal, the city would lose $35,000 in fiscal 2006 over what it now
loses in exemptions and an additional $200,000 by 2012.
Page 1
•
•
Fw Commerce city manager advises council against tax freeze
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 9:41 AM
To: Green, Shannon
subject: Fw: Commerce: city manager advises council against tax freeze
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---original message -----
sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 12:30 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Commerce: city manager advises council against tax freeze
Commerce advised against tax freeze
By jay Strickland/Greenville Herald -Banner Staff Thursday, November 18, 2004 1:06 AM
CST
COMMERCE -- City Manager Bill Shipp advised the Commerce City Council it was not the
time to enact a tax freeze on the homesteads of disabled residents and those 65 and
older.
Shipp made the comments at a Council workshop session Thursday, citing uncertainty
about whether state lawmakers would change the legislation that allowed the tax
freeze during the next session and the need to keep the tax base as broad as
possible while the city is trying to grow.
"In my mind, there are two issues here," Shipp said. "One issue is certainly whether
or not the Council should consider this tax freeze. But I think the other issue is
whether this is the time to consider this tax freeze. There are many things
happening right now that z think make this not a particularly good time to consider
a limiting of your revenue."
According to figures compiled by city staff, there are currently 1,049 homesteads in
Commerce. of those, 448, or 42.7 percent, are owned by those 65 or older or
disabled. A tax freeze would cap the taxes at the current dollar amount. The amount
could go down, but not up.
If the city raised taxes by one cent, Commerce would lose a little over $2,500 the
first year, according to city estimates. If the valuation went up $3,000, the city
would lose $9,309.
Shipp also said that the tax freeze could very likely be looked at again during the
next session of the State Legislature. Changes could be made to the legislation
which allowed it.
Another factor in holding off on a tax freeze at the current time is the uncertainty
over valuations by the Hunt county Appraisal District, according to Shipp. The HCAD
has come under fire from school districts in the county which continue to receive
state value on property rather than the local value. If the A praisal District comes
more in line with state values, property valuations will likely increase.
About 10 residents showed up at the meeting to voice opinions in favor of a tax
freeze. Richard Roe, a former physician in the Commerce area, said about 80 percent
of people over 65 depend almost entirely on Social security for their income.
"The promise of higher increases in the future, significantly higher because Hunt
Countyproperties are undervalued, would put a strain on people, Roe said. "I was
in business here a long time and z became very familiar with people. It was pretty
much a geriatric practice. A lot of these people are living pretty much on the edge
now.,,
The Council still wasn't willing to put the issue to rest. Mayor Sheryl zelhart said
Page 1
U
•
Fw commerce city manager advises council against tax freeze
she would like some more comprehensive projections from city staff about the effect
any tax freeze would have.
Page 2
FW Frisco council votes for senior tax break
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 10:10 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: Frisco: council votes for senior tax break
For fiscal Affairs Committee. c
---Original message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:35 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Frisco: council votes for senior tax break
Frisco votes for senior tax break
Disabled residents also aided by homestead exemption increase
01:58 AM CST on Wednesday, November 17, 2004 By STELLA M. CHAVEZ / The Dallas
Morning News
FRISCO - Frisco seniors and disabled residents are getting some tax relief.
By a 4-2 vote, Frisco City Council members on Tuesday approved an ordinance to raise
the homestead exemption from $10,000 to $30,000 for homeowners age 65 and older and
residents with disabilities.
Council member Jim Joyner and Mayor Pro Tem Maher Maso voted against the measure.
Moments before Mr. Joyner had proposed increasing the exemption to $50,000, but only
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Matt Lafata supported that idea.
Mr. Maso said he had wanted to propose a $60,000 tax exemption spread out over four
years.
A number of seniors who turned out for the meeting asked the council to act quickly
and pass a resolution that would give seniors a tax break.
"I was hoping they would at least give us $50,000, but we'll take what we can get,"
said Vi Beamer Clark, 78, who attended the meeting with her husband, Paul.
The city has 1,052 accounts that qualify for the exemption. It will take effect on
taxes paid in January 2006 and cost the city $135,708 based on the current tax rate.
The property tax bill on a house valued at $235,000, the city's average, would drop
by about $86.
The tax -relief plan had been discussed during the last year. Council members said
they wanted to do something to help seniors, but most believed freezing taxes was
not a viable option because they could not rescind such action once it was adopted.
Only Mayor Mike Simpson said he supported freezing taxes. He said raising the tax
exemption would provide less relief for seniors in the long run than a tax break.
"I know seniors that are spending $400 in medical expenses," he said.
Last year, Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment that allows cities to
freeze property taxes for those 65 and older as well as disabled homeowners.
Plano adopted a tax freeze measure in May. Prosper, Collin County and the Frisco
Independent School District also have freezes in place. other cities had such
measures on the ballot in the recent election.
Some Frisco council members, however, say there are too many uncertainties to
Page 1
•
•
Fw Frisco council votes for senior tax break
approve a tax freeze. They say possible changes to school financing and the sales
tax could severely impact the city's finances.
"To do so now, while we might be looking out for one group, we might not be for
another group," said council member Tony Felker.
That's not to say a tax freeze is completely out of the picture.
After the vote, Mr. Allen told seniors that the city would continue to study the
issue.
Page 2
Fw Baytown tax cap for seniors disabled approved
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 5:40 PM
TO: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: Baytown: tax cap for seniors, disabled approved
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---original Message-----
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 5:54 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Baytown: tax cap for seniors, disabled approved
Tax cap for seniors, disabled approved
By Kristopher Banks
Baytown Sun
Published November 12, 2004
BAYTOWN — Senior citizens and the disabled will never pay more than what they pay on
their next property tax bill for the city of Baytown.
City Council unanimously passed a cap on the taxes for those 65 and older and the
disabled Thursdayy. The tax cap means the dollar amount of the taxes that those who
qualify pay tothe city cannot go up, regardless of rising property values or tax
hikes by the city. It can, however, go down.
The cap cannot be reversed by any action of the city. The effects will not be seen
until seniors and the disabled pay their tax bills in spring 2006.
The tax cap was enabled by a state constitutional amendment that passed with about
81 percent of the vote in 2003. Roughly 84 percent of people in Baytown voted for
it.
Seniors lined up to speak for the tax cap.
"The seniors and disabled have made Baytown what it is today, and they deserve a
break," said Steve Coycault, regional representative of the silver -Haired
Legislature, a statewide group that advocates for senior citizens.
Lee LeBouf said seniors face increasing tax bills with decreasing means to pay them.
"Our income doesn't increase, and the pensions just shrink," he said.
Carolyn Brumley said raising exemptions would not be a permanent help.
"An exemption would help short term, but a freeze would help forever," she said.
Councilman Scott Sheley presented some information about the possibility of raising
exemptions. Seniors and the disabled receive a $50,000 reduction on the value of
their property for consideration of city property taxes.
According to Sheley's figures, if the city raised the exemption $3,500, those with
homes valued at $140,000 or less would actually pay less even after an expected 3
percent jump in property values next year.
Sheley said that since the tax cap is permanent, Council should consider what other
options are available.
"if we take the time, we have until the 31st of December to look at this possible
option," he said.
But councilman Don Murray said an overwhelming number of people voted for the tax
Page 1
•
Fw Baytown tax cap for seniors disabled approved
cap because it was permanent.
"Eighty -something percent of the citizens of Baytown and 80-something percent of
Texans did not vote for council to diddle with tax exemptions; they voted to freeze
taxes," he said.
In the end, all of council voted for the tax cap.
The city of Baytown has estimated the tax cap would cost the city about $152,679 in
the first year,.which would consist of about 0.36 percent of this year's general
fund revenue. city officials have acknowledged that number will go up.
In 2003, 3,880 households qualified for the senior citizen or disabled exemption in
Baytown.
The average home value in Baytown is $76,000. According to the city's figures, 56
percent of those with senior and disabled accounts pay less than $100 per year in
property taxes. After the exemptions the city offers and a standard homestead
exemption, a house would have to be worth more than about $80,000 for someone to pay
more than $100 per year.
According to the city, 38 percent of those with senior and disabled exemptions pay
no taxes at all.
Page 2
FW Baytown paper reports TML and other city positions on tax freeze
From: Alexander, Cynthia
sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 10:51 AM
To: Green, Shannon
subject: FW: Baytown: paper reports TML and other city positions on tax
freeze
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---Original Message-----
sent: Sunday, November 07, 2004 5:04 PM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Baytown: paper reports TML and other city positions on tax freeze
Senior tax freeze not supported by all cities
By Kristopher Banks
Baytown Sun
Published November 07, 2004
There has been widespread support for the idea of capping taxes for senior citizens
and the disabled in Baytown - and that was to be expected. Roughly 84 percent of
Baytonians voted to allow it in a 2003 election for state constitutional amendments.
Council may enact the cap as early as Thursday.
in the few times Council addressed the matter, the audience has been filled with
supporters for the measure. If there were any opponents, they sat silently. In the
last city election, almost every candidate in a contested race promised to vote for
the tax cap - every winner, at least.
Statewide, the story is pretty much the same. More than 80 percent voted for the
cap, often called a freeze, which allows cities and other taxing districts to keep
property values and tax rates at a set amount for those 65 or older and the legally
disabled. City councils that turn down the tax cap have been overturned with a
referendum vote of the public without fail - except in one city.
The City of windcrest, on the northeast border of San Antonio, is about as small as
a home -rule city can get. it has just 5,300 residents living on 1.82 square miles.
About 56 percent of households include one or more senior citizens. And last
September, a majority of them said "No, thank you" to the seniors/disabled tax cap.
The process went the same as in many other cities: City Council considered and
rejected the cap. senior citizens collected signatures from the necessary 5 percent
of registered voters to force the tax cap onto the ballot. Council called a special
election. But when Election Day came, about 56 percent voted the cap down.
so far, according to both the Texas Municipal League, an organization
that assists and represents cities, and the Texas Silver -Haired Legislature, a
senior activist group that has been the lead proponent of the cap, windcrest is the
only city that has rejected the freeze in an election.
City leaders, who opposed the measure, attributed the loss to a few factors: an
informed electorate, an aggressive political campaign and some unique
characteristics of the city - characteristics that may make it a difficult
comparison to Baytown.
windcrest Mayor jack Leonhardt said the tax cap is a good idea for some cities, but
not for windcrest. According to informational material distributed by the city, the
tax cap would cost the city an average of about $132,641 per year for the next nine
years,currently about 4 percent of the city's annual revenue. Residents recognized
that kind of impact, Leonhardt said.
Page 1
Fw Baytown paper reports TML and other city positions on tax freeze
"bur residents love this city," he said. "They want to keep home values up and keep
a high quality of streets. They're very demanding and exRect a very high quality of
service, and those things just don't come without money.'
The city of Baytown has estimated the tax cap would cost the city about $152,679 in
the first year, which would consist of about 0.36 percent of this years general
fund revenue.
Leonhardt said the informational materials, which did not explicitly endorse a
position, put doubts in many residents' minds, but when they saw political
advertising opposing the tax cap, it confirmed their doubts because they knew other
people had them.
"No one wants to be the Lone Ranger," he said.
Mayor Pro Tem Jim Tremblay was responsible for the political campaign opposing the
cap. Tremblay, himself both a senior citizen and a disabled person, began a
political action committee that sent mail -outs opposing the tax cap.
"The fundamental principle was fairness," he said. "If I am 65 and I am disabled, I
would qualify for the tax freeze. That means my 60-year-old neighbor to the west and
my 557year-old neighbor to the east would have to pay for my share. ... it would be
treating my neighbors unfairly."
The election was particularly remarkable because windcrest has such a high
percentage of senior citizens, he said.
"There were a large number (of citizens), many of whom could have qualified but
said, 'No, we want to pay our fair share., "
But both Tremblay and Leonhardt said windcrest may be an unusual situation. Many
differences stand out between windcrest and Baytown. About 56 percent of households
in windcrest would qualify for the tax cap based on the senior qualification alone.
Less than half that number, 21 percent, would qualify for the cap in Baytown,
meaning the cap would have a greater effect in windcrest.
windcrest also has little chance of ever growing beyond 1.82 square miles. It's
landlocked — surrounded on all sides by San Antonio and other municipalities. This
means it has little hope of increasing its property tax revenues, particularly if
most of its homes' values are locked in place.
Baytown, on the other hand, is a city of 33 to 34 square miles, and can annex
property to its north and east. it has annexed several acres this year.
one of the most significant differences is wealth. windcrest is largely populated by
retirees from San Antonio's military installations with healthy pensions and retired
professionals, Tremblay said. The average home value is $124,000.
"I know a lot of people on just social Security," said Jane Roberts, a retired
Baytown teacher who is pushing for the tax cap. "They need a break somewhere from
somebody."
About one in 11 Baytonians 65 or older live below the poverty line, according to the
2000 census.
The average home value in Baytown is $76,000, although figures from the city
indicate more than 44 percent of seniors and the disabled live in homes worth more
than the average.
According to the figures, 56 percent of those with senior and disabled accounts pay
less than $100 per year in property taxes. After the exemptions the city offers and
a standard homestead exemption, a house would have to be worth more than about
$80,000 for someone to pay more than $100 per year.
Page 2
FW Baytown paper reports TML and other city positions on tax freeze
Exemptions are something Baytown offers that windcrest does not. The city offers a
$50,000 reduction on the value of property for seniors and the disabled. About 38
percent of senior citizen and disabled accounts pay no property taxes to the city at
all.
If Council chooses to enact the tax freeze, they can reduce the exemption, which may
have a greater effect on some seniors than rising property values.
"It would be better for them to not pass the tax freeze than to lower the
exemptions," Roberts said.
The TML, which usually advises cities on such matters, has kept its opinion on this
matter but urges cities to be cautious. Baytown Councilman Scott Sheley, a regional
vice president for TML, expressed the same caution Thursday, saying he did not
believe Council was ready to vote on the issue.
Council should look at other options like raising the exemptions, he said. once the
cap passes, it becomes permanent and no action of the city can reverse it.
"It's just important now to get a better perspective on which way to go," he said.
At least two Council members, Mayor Calvin Mundinger and Councilman Mercedes
Renteria III, said they supported the cap, and Roberts said she heard from four
Councilmen who will vote for it — enough to pass it.
If they do not approve the cap, Roberts said she has the petition and workers are
already lined up to gather signatures. They need about 1,650, according to the last
count of registered voters.
Not that Council should feel pressured, she said.
"we want to give them the opportunity to do what they said they would do," she said.
Council meets at 6:30 p.m. Thursday at City Hall. Those wishing to speak on the tax
cap may sign up before the meeting.
Page 3
• 0
FW Rowlett tax freeze will not leave
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 10:56 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: Rowlett: tax freeze will not leave
For fiscal affairs committee. c
-----Original message -----
sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 10:02 PM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Rowlett: tax freeze will not leave
Senior tax freeze won't leave
By: Wendy Kay Strain,
Rowlett Lakeshore Times
11/04/2004
The discussion during the work session was mostly to consider the various options
available to seniors and council in establishing some kind of tax freeze for the
seniors of the area.
According to the City Attorney Bob Hagar, there are three options still open in
establishing a senior tax freeze.
Two of the methods would become binding decisions, which is what the council has
been working to avoid to date in recent discussions. one of those options would also
require more work on the part of the seniors in the city currentlypobbying to get
the ordinance passed, again creating a situation most of the councilors wish to
avoid.
one option remains viable, though, that remains non -binding and requires little
additional effort from the community's seniors.
According to Hagar, the option of a non -binding referendum would give the councilors
the input they are requesting from a wide sampging of the city 's residents while
remaining non -committal in the actions to be carried out as a result of that vote.
Although they did not decide whether to pursue the referendum at this time, the rate
of discussion had to be established to be sure the issue was brought before voters
within required time parameters established by the state.
To keep the issue non -political, the council discussed the idea of holding a vote at
the next possible date the machines would be available from Dallas County sometime
in February, but a special election of this sort would cost the city approximately
$5,000.
if the council instead decided to put the issue on the next general election ballot
in May, the addition would only cost the city an additional $1,000.
Depending on which date the council were to decide to put the issue before the
public, information would have to be released at least 60 days prior to the
election. Had they decided on the February date, the council would need to decide
whether to pursue the option or not within the next month.
Only one council member expressed dissatisfaction with the proposed idea because of
the additional expense. Al Alberts insisted that the senior tax freeze should not
require the expense and extra step of asking residents to vote on the issue.
"The voters have already told us what they want and they want the tax freeze," he
said.
Page 1
0 •
Fw Rowlett tax freeze will not leave
However, should the council determine that seeking a non -binding referendum is the
only way agreement can be obtained on the issue, it should appear on the May
election ballot.
The regular session agenda item was to increase the amount of the senior tax
exemption from the current rate of $60,000 to an adjusted rate of $67,000 as a means
of keeping up with increases in property taxes.
A motion on the item was made immediately by Al Alberts and seconded by David Bryan
to approve the increased exemption rate, but Steve Ma giotto argued for the council
to wait until the results are in from the state legislative talks regarding school
financing.
"z would like to see us wait out the process of the state legislature for school
financing," he said. "There may be a lot of relief in that area that would make this
increase unnecessary."
After further discussion on both sides, the council voted to approve the item on a
vote of 4-3, with Cindy Rushing, Becky Sebastian and Steve Maggiotto voting against
the issue.
Page 2
0
Fw Frisco council discusses tax breaks for seniors
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 10:58 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw:.Frisco: council discusses tax breaks for seniors
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---Original message -----
sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 9:57 PM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
subject: Frisco: council discusses tax breaks for seniors
Council discusses tax breaks for seniors
By mike Raye, staff writer
Frisco Enterprise
11/05/2004
Easing the taxpaying burden on the city's senior citizens was a topic of lively
discussion Tuesday night, as the City Council and staff sought ways to provide
continuing relief for generations without setting a solution in stone.
In September 2003 Texas voters approved Proposition 13 by an overwhelming 91
percent, creating a constitutional amendment that empowers local governments to
institute a property tax ceiling for the elderlX and disabled. The rub is, once the
freeze is set into place, it is "grandfathered,meaning it can never be repealed.
That was the fact that tripped the council.
"I understand why so many people are for this tax freeze, but realistically, they
won't feel the benefits of it for another 10 to 20 years," council member Bob Allen
said. "I am not in favor of this freeze because we owe it to the generations ahead
of us to think this through."
Allen said freezing seniors' tax bills would put an undue burden on other citizens,
as the percentage of over-65 members of the population rises.
"The increases in population show that we're going to have a lot more people over 60
than under 60 in the years to come, which then means the people under 60 are the
ones that are going to carry that burden," he said.
According to the Texas Municipal League, 20 percent of Texas cities have implemented
the freeze, including Lewisville, which adopted it in June, and Plano, which put on
a freeze in May. Collin County and the Frisco Independent School District also have
over-65 property tax freezes in place.
Currently, Frisco allows a tax exemption of $10,000 for both over-65 residents and
the disabled. Assistant City manager Jason Gray presented several directions the
council could go, from putting on a tax freeze to raising the amount of exemption.
Although re]ecting the tax freeze outright because of its inherent restrictions,
council members said they would entertain the idea of raising the level of exemption
to as much as $30,000. only Mayor Mike Simpson spoke in favor of a tax freeze.
"I'm the only one up here that would be in favor of a tax freeze," he said. "Senior
citizens really took a hit (financially) in 2000 and they've never recovered from
it. social security continues to go up and the cost of drugs continue to go up," he
said, explaining that most seniors live on a fixed income and need help paying the
bills.
"Some kind of tax relief is needed for our seniors," Mayor Pro Tem Maher Maso said.
"if we raise the exemption it would have an immediate effect."
Page 1
• 0
FW Frisco council discusses tax breaks for seniors
Council member Joy west agreed that something should be done, but said a tax freeze
was not an answer. Council members Tony Felker and Matt Lafata said no to the
freeze, but suggested raising the exemption from the current $10,000 to $30,000,
citing that the area average is $31,000. Lewisville has a $60,000 exemption -and
Dallas' exemption is $64,000.
Frisco resident Ernie Eggleston said raising the exemption to $50,000 would help
seniors like himself and his neighbors.
"I'm here tonight asking you to move forward on this," he told the council. To do
nothing would e an option, but seniors need a special tax consideration because so
many of us are on a fixed income."
Allen said while making a decision, the city and council should keep its sights on
the future.
"An exemption would benefit people more than a tax freeze will," he said. "People in
their 40s now will be impacted when they become over 65 by a tax freeze we put in
today.'
The council directed city staff to further investigate the options, and return an
ordinance for approval soon.
Page 2
0
0
:w corpus Christi lost revenues from tax freeze force city college to adjust spending tax rates
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 4:00 PM
To: Green, Shannon
subject: Fw: corpus Christi: lost revenues from tax freeze force city,
college to adjust spending, tax rates
For fiscal affairs committee. c
--original message -----
sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 7:17 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Corpus Christi: lost revenues from tax freeze force city, college to adjust
spending, tax rates
Officials start totaling freezes' costs
Lost revenues force city, college to adjust spending, tax rates
By Neal Falgoust and Icess Fernandez Caller -Times
November 4, 2004
The day after voters agreed to freeze the tax bills of many Del Mar College and city
taxpayers, officials began trying to figure out what effect that freeze would have
on their ability to provide services.
At City Hall, senior administrators began studying what effect the freeze would have
on the city's financial future. They also were preparing for a presentation they
soon will have to make to City Council.
Del Mar College officials prepared for a similar presentation to their Board of
Regents.
Both City Hall and the college said they would be looking at cutting services,
finding alternative sources of income and increasing taxes to cover the projected
shortfall the freezes will have on their budgets.
"we have to make it up somewhere," Del Mar College President Carlos Garcia said.
City Manager Skip Noe said city staff would be looking at all possibilities, but "at
this point there are no planned cuts."
Approval of the tax freezes came with an overwhelming margin, with more than 70
percent of Del Mar College and city voters approving the measures. The freeze
permanently limits the tax bills of seniors and the disabled to the amount of this
year's bill.
Del Mar's Proposition 1 passed with 71 percent of the vote, or 59,020 to 23553,
according to complete unofficial returns with 111 of 111 precincts reporting.
City Proposition 6 passed by 72 percent, or 59,125 to 22977, according to complete
unofficial returns with 107 of 107 precincts reporting.
The two propositions were placed on the ballot by the Corpus Christi Taxpayers'
Association, which circulated a petition on the matter months before the election.
They were an outgrowth of the state's Proposition 13, a constitutional amendment
that allowed government bodies to freeze the tax bills of elderly and disabled
homeowners.
Projections by both City Hall and the college indicate they will lose hundreds of
thousands of dollars in the next few years because of the freeze, and will lose
millions of dollars in a decade as the Baby Boomer generation begins to retire.
Assistant City Manager Oscar Martinez, who oversees the city's financial
Page 1
0
0
=w Corpus Christi lost revenues from tax freeze force city college to adjust spending tax rates
departments, said his staff would be working this week to develop an updated
projection on the tax freeze's effect. Previous projections, which showed a $3.1
million shortfall by the year 2013, were based on last year's tax roll. That roll
grew 7 percent between 2003 and 2004, according to the Nueces County appraisal
District.
The new figures should be ready by Friday, and will be presented to the City Council
at a subsequent meeting.
'Someone has to pay'
The next step for college officials also will be deciding how to make up the
difference in income. officials predict the college will lose $150,000 in tax
revenue each year.
options for making up the difference include raising tuition, requesting more state
money and cutting services. But raising taxes is not being considered at this time,
Garcia said.
He said the college is looking at raising private money for scholarships, equipment
and professional development. Del Mar also will ask through a state college
coalition for the legislature to increase funding.
"Even if they increase credit hour reimbursement (to) where we were four years ago,
it would be OK," Garcia said.
College departments have been asked to trim their budgets, Garcia said.
Board of Regents President Gabe Rivas said board policy allows the regents to
increase tuition each year, with the minimum increase set at $1 per credit hour.
"Someone has,to pay," Rivas said. "I hate to put it that way. we'll see what we can
do not to raise tuition."
Too early to slash services
City Councilman Rex Kinnison, a certified public accountant, said it still was too
early for City Hall to talk about cutting services to save money. He said a council
committee would be meeting in the coming weeks to begin talking about next year's
budget. The process for drafting that plan, which will be presented to the full
council -by summer, begins in February.
Kinnison said the council would be looking at the staff's five-year forecast of the
city's financial health during the next two weeks and would make decisions about
spending based on that analysis.
Page 2
•
Fw Guadalupe county all three cities in county with Prop 13 elections pass
From: Alexander, Cynthia
sent: wednesday, November 03, 2004 8:22 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: Guadalupe County: all three cities in county with Prop 13
elections pass
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---Original message -----
sent: wednesday, November 03, 2004 8:19 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Guadalupe County: all three cities in county with Prop 13 elections pass
Cities approve tax freeze
Chris Hawkes
Seguin Gazette
Published November 03, 2004
GUADALUPE COUNTY — A tax freeze for seniors got the thumbs up from voters Tuesday
night.
Harvey Hild, who spearheaded an effort to get Proposition 13 passed, is happy with
the results. Proposition 13 — a state constitutional amendment approved by 89
percent of Texas voters and 81 percent of Guadalupe county voters in September 2003
— permits counties, cities and towns, and junior college districts to establish an
ad valorem tax freeze on residence homesteads of the disabled and of the elderly.
Seguin, Marion and Schertz voters each approved tax freezes in their respective
cities.
Proposition 13 passed with a vote for 75 percent to 13 percent against in Seguin.
Marion's race was a little closer with a 70 to 42 percent win. The most contested
race was in Schertz where voters approved the tax freeze 4,900-1,114.
School property taxes on a home cannot be increased once a homeowner reaches the age
of 65. Proposition 13 lets counties, cities, towns and junior college districts
extend this tax freeze to the property taxes paid to those governmental bodies as
well.
Page 1
0
•
FW New Braunfels property tax freeze passes
From: Alexander, Cynthia
sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 8:22 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: New Braunfels: property tax freeze passes
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---original message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 8:18 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: New Braunfels: property tax freeze passes
Property tax freeze passes
By Scott Mahon
The Herald-zeitung
Published November 03, 2004
Although the city's early vote count wasn't completed until early this morning,
unofficial results Tuesday night showed 2,078 voters in six voting districts voted
for Proposition 1 to freeze city property taxes, and 1,003 voted against it.
Called Proposition 1 on Tuesday's ballot, the measure was passed last year by 80
percent of the voters across the state, and provided that local residents could
petition the city and/or county to force a vote on the issue.
A group New Braunfels seniors, led by Wayne Rudolph, led a petition drive early this
summer to force the New Braunfels City Council to put the measure up for election.
However, council voted unanimously in June to put the measure on the Nov. 2 ballot.
Mayor Adam Cork said the general election would allow more voters to vote on the
issue.
"I think we should have as many people in the community as possible vote on the
issue," Cork said in June.
Cork said Tuesday night, before the early vote count, it would now be up to council
to minimize the impact of the property tax freeze.
"It'll be our job to bring in as much economic development as possible to minimize
the impact of Proposition 1," he said.
Cork argued this summer that freezing property taxes for senior citizens would shift
the burden of paying for services to younger property owners.
"If we were to freeze property taxes for seniors, an extreme example would be if
seniors petitioned for a $100 million swimming pool and tennis court, and it passed
because of the senior vote," he said. "But seniors wouldn't pay for it. The same for
street improvements. So we have to be clear about what the impact would be."
Cork said the measure would cost the city approximately $70,000 in lost tax revenues
in 2005, when it takes effect.
The measure passed overwhelmingly in the county election.
Rudolph said there was less opposition to the measure in rural areas of the county.
"There was some opposition to it in the city, especially by some of the city
council," he said. "But when we were gathering signatures for the county petition,
we didn't find a lot of opposition."
Page 1
0
•
FW New Braunfels property tax freeze passes
District 6 Councilman Ken valentine, who supported the tax freeze, said Tuesday's
unofficial results showed that elected officials were out -of -step with their
constituents.
"While not all seniors need tax relief, many seniors really need help," valentine
said. "Proposition 1 is a way to offer that relief."
City Manager Chuck Pinto said if property taxes had been frozen for seniors over the
last 10 years, the city would have lost $575,000 in tax revenues.
The freeze goes into effect for the 2005 tax year and locks in property taxes for
those over age 65 and disabled homeowners.
Page 2
0
•
FW Frisco council is exploring options in proposal that aids seniors disabled
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 1:14 PM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: Frisco: council is exploring options in proposal that aids
seniors, disabled
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 8:06 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Frisco: council is exploring options in proposal that aids seniors,
disabled
City to address tax -freeze queries
Council is exploring options in proposal that aids seniors, disabled
02:39 AM CST on Tuesday, November 2, 2004 By STELLA M. CHAVEZ / The Dallas Morning
News
Eight months ago, Frisco City Council members discussed a proposal to freeze taxes
on properties owned by senior citizens and disabled residents, but the idea was met
With many questions about long-term costs to the city.
Tonight, city staffers will answer some of those questions. The council has a few
options from which to choose, from doing nothing to capping the tax amount to
raising the current tax -exemption level.
The potential impact of a freeze is difficult to gauge because of several factors,
including the tax rate, home values and the senior population, said Assistant City
Manager Jason Gray.
"we're trying not to focus too much on specific numbers," he said. "what we tried to
do is to give the council an idea across a spectrum of homes."
Frisco currently grants a $10,000 homestead exemption for disabled residents and
seniors 65 and older.
Each scenario to be presented to the council tonight shows the financial impact over
15 years. City staff examined what would happen if taxes were frozen on a $235,551
home - the average home value in Frisco - up to a $300,000 home. The examples also
take into account the $10,000 exemption and pose scenarios in which the exemption
level is raised to $50,000.
one example shows what would happen if taxes were frozen on a $235,551 house. If
home values rose 4 percent the first five years and 3 percent after that, the city
would lose roughly $5,827.40 per household over a 15-year period.
A constitutional amendment approved by Texas voters last year allows cities to
freeze property taxes for residents 65 and older as well as the disabled.
Plano adopted a tax freeze measure in May. Prosper, Collin County and the Frisco
Independent School District also have freezes. voters in other cities, such as
Fredericksburg, Texas, will be voting on a freeze today.
Some seniors, however, say a freeze is not enough.
City officials "don't realize that it's just going to be a few dollars," said Nancy
D. Foster, a four -term member of the Texas Silver -Haired Legislature, which lobbies
for seniors.
Page 1
•
Fw Frisco council is exploring options in proposal that aids seniors disabled
Ms. Foster, a Frisco resident, said a freeze is necessary because many seniors live
on fixed incomes.
"If they've been taxed out of their house, they won't have any place to live," she
said. "If we dangle all of these people out, we're going to have to build long-term
health care facilities."
Some council members say they favor measures that help seniors but feel the tax
freeze legislation is too limiting. Once such a measure is passed, the council
cannot reverse it or make changes, said Mayor Fro Tem Maher Maso.
"I'm not convinced that the tax freeze is the way to go yet," Mr. Maso said. "I
don't think anyone disagrees or questions the need for seniors to have special tax
considerations due to their fixed income, but it needs to be fair."
Council member Bob Allen said he's worried about the long-term impact if a freeze is
adopted, and he has suggested in the past that the city raise the homestead
exemption amount instead. He added that he has not made up his mind on the matter.
"The increases in population show that we're going to have a lot more people over 60
than under 60, which then means the people under 60 are the ones that are going to
carry that burden," he said. "It's a challenging situation."
E-mail schavez@dallasnews.com
SEVERAL TAX SCENARIOS
Frisco grants a $10,000 exemption for disabled residents
city staff examined what would occur to property taxes on
average value - under various scenarios.
Year Appraised
property
value
Annual city taxes, with
a $10,000 exemption,
no tax freeze
Annual city taxes, with
a $10,000 exemption
and tax freeze
Annual city taxes, with
a $50,000 exemption,
no tax freeze
2004 $235,551
2005 $244,973
2006 $254,772
2007 $264,963
2008 $275,561
2009 $289,339
$1,049.02
2011 $306,960
2012 $316,169
2013 $325,654
2014 $335,424
2015 $345,486
2016 $355,851
and those 65 and older.
a $235,551 home - Frisco's
$953.99 $953.99 $953.99
$993.84 $953.99 $824.66
$1,035.29 $953.99 $866.10
$1,078.39 $953.99 $909.21
$1,123.22 $953.99 $954.03
$1,181.49 $953.99 $1,012.31 2010 $298,020 $1,218.21 $953.99
$1,256.02 $953.99 $1,086.84
$1,294.97 $953.99 $1,125.79
$1,335.09 $953.99 $1,165.91
$1,376.41 $953.99 $1,207.23
$1,418.97 $953.99 $1,249.79
$1,462.81 $953.99 $1,293.63
Page 2
Fw Frisco council is exploring options in
2017 $366,527 $1,507.96 $953.99 $1,338.78
2018 $377,522 $1,554.47 $953.99 $1,385.29
2019 $388,848 $1,602.38 $953.99 $1,433.19
$1,482.53
SOURCE: City of Frisco
Page 3
proposal that aids seniors disabled
2020 $400,513 $1,651.72 $953.99
•
Fw Baytown paper says to freeze taxes for seniors disabled
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 11:06 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: Baytown: paper says to freeze taxes for seniors, disabled
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---original message -----
sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 12:13 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
subject: Baytown: paper says to freeze taxes for seniors, disabled
Freeze taxes for seniors, disabled
By David Bloom
Baytown Sun
Published October 29, 2004
Living to be 65 earns 10 percent discounts on fast food, movie tickets and other
items with an averagesavings of less than a dollar. Meanwhile the door is kept shut
by Baytown City Council to allow those seniors and disabled on low and fixed incomes
to get a break from one of the biggest bills they face annually, property tax.
Most Baytown seniors would no doubt be happy to give up that 10 percent discount on
a cup of coffee knowing their property taxes won t skyrocket while their incomes
remain fixed.
To that end, Baytown Mayor Calvin Mundinger said this week a vote to grant or deny a
property tax freeze for senior and disabled homeowners will be on City council's
agenda Nov. 11. That's great ... but we wonder what took so long?
Baytown City Council has been discussing the property tax freeze since October 2003.
For more than a year, it's been all talk and no walk.
This inaction does not reflect well on three members of Baytown City Council —
Mundinger, and councilmen Mercedes Renteria III and Sammy Mahan — who each vowed to
support the tax freeze during their campaigns for office earlier this year.
Moreover, council's inaction has mobilized some Baytown seniors to organize a
petition drive to put the matter before voters in a special election. Such an
initiative — which voters would clearly support — would require about 1,650
signatures.
we hope City Council does not let it come to that, especially with three members who
are already on the record supporting the measure.
In September 2003, Texas voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment
to allow cities and counties to freeze property taxes for disabled and elderly
residents. The amendment is simply designed to alleviate some of the tax burdens
faced by the elderly and the disabled on fixed incomes that have been adversely
impacted by rising property taxes.
In our area, the cities of Anahuac, Conroe, Deer Park, Dickinson, Jamaica Beach,
Morgan's Point, Pasadena, Santa Fe, Seabrook and South Houston have already enacted
the tax freeze.
The exemption would cost the city of Baytown about $153,000 in the first year, and
an estimated $1 million in five years and around $2.8 million in 10 years.
The freeze cannot be revoked unless the state law is changed.
Council has until Dec. 31 to pass the freeze on property taxes for senior citizens
Page 1
Fw Baytown paper says to freeze taxes for seniors disabled
and the disabled if it is to affect the tax bills those homeowners will pay in early
2006.
Critics, which apparently includes a few councilmen, believe such a move restricts
the city from raising much -needed revenue when property taxes rise and shifts the
burden on to remaining taxpayers, who might also have tough times making ends meet.
That may be true, but the tax freeze could also prevent senior or disabled
homeowners from having to leave their homes because they cannot pay property taxes.
we believe the city of Baytown would do well standing by those who have worked all
their lives to make it a better place. City Council should approve the tax freeze as
soon as possible.
Today's editorial was written by David Bloom, managing editor of The Baytown sun, on
behalf of the newspaper's editorial board.
Page 2
0
•
FW Montgomery County considers more fees for using credit and debt cards
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 2:06 PM
To: Dolby, Michael; wolny, Shelley; williams, LeAnn
Cc: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: Montgomery County considers more fees for using credit and
debt cards
For research and discussion. c
---Original message -----
sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 1:16 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Montgomery County considers more fees for using credit and debt cards
Oct. 26, 2004, 7:54PM
Montgomery County considers more credit fees Residents may see another 5 % charge
for service
By BETH KUHLES
Chronicle Correspondent
RESOURCES
CHARGE CARD FEES
The existing credit card payment system for Montgomery County is managed by official
Payments Corp., and includes a convenience fee, which is a percentage based on the
amount charged. County officials have approved installing a new credit card terminal
system for the collections department, which will charge a 4 percent fee on top of
the percentage -based fee for transactions handled by that department. County
officials also are studying whether to charge an additional 5 percent surcharge in
the future. The following is a breakdown of existing fees: •$4.95 charge for
services up to $99
•$8.95 charge for services of $100-199
•$23.95 charge of services of $400-599
Source: Montgomery County
Montgomery County is investigating whether it should tack on its own user fee for
those who pay for county services with a credit or debit card.
People who pay court costs, traffic fines, alarm fees or county taxes with a credit
card may face up to an additional $5 or 5 percent surcharge per transaction if the
proposal is adopted. If approved, the surcharge has the potential to generate up to
$800,000 a year for county coffers, said Mark Bosma, purchasing agent for Montgomery
County.
"It's worth the research," County judge Alan B. Sadler told Montgomery County
Commissioners Court.
More credit charges
The surcharge proposal was raised after Montgomery County approved the first credit
card terminal system for the collections department at a recent meeting. The system
will be installed by state Metropolitan county Services. other county departments
are being asked if they would like to start a similar card swipe system for customer
payments.
Credit cards have been accepted for county payments since the 1990s, but it is now
done over the phone using a code system. About 35 percent of the people processing
Page 1
•
FW Montgomery County considers more fees for using credit and debt cards
court and alarm payments through the county's collections department are using
credit cards, said Nadine Jenkins, director of collections for the county.
The existing credit card payment system, managed by official Payments Corp.,
includes a convenience fee, which is a percentage based on the amount charged. For
example, for a transaction of up to $99.99, the fee is $4.95; up to $199.99, the fee
is $8.95; and between $400 and $599.99, the fee is $23.95. Customers are told about
these fees before the transaction is processed, Jenkins said.
Time savings
The system is time consuming because it requires county staff to enter data in the
computer and to get verification from the credit card company, Jenkins said. The new
system will expedite the process and will eliminate paperwork for the county
workers.
"This will help speed up the pprocess," Jenkins said. "our goal is to assist the
customer as quickly as possible and to assist with the efficiency of the office. By
swiping the card, it will improve the overall use of credit cards."
under the new system, the county has negotiated a flat 4 percent convenience fee
that the processing company can collect from those who pay through the collections
department.
In exchange, the county collections department will get the terminal system free of
charge. The county's proposed surcharge would be added on top of the existing
convenience fee.
Generating revenue
Bosma is doing research on the proposed surcharge, which will be presented to
Montgomery County Commissioners Court in the future for consideration.
Bosma estimates there are about 178,000 customer transactions, including credit
cards, checks and cash, in the county every year.
Proposed charges
Based on the proposed charges, this could generate up to $800,000 in funds for the
county annually if everyone used a credit card to pay for services.
Bosma said the state law allows county governments to add a $5 or 5 percent
surcharge to county transactions and several cities in the area have added these
fees.
Page 2
•
•
Fw Baytown council pressured to enact tax freeze
From: Alexander, Cynthia
sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 2:05 PM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: FW: Baytown: council pressured to enact tax freeze
For fiscal affairs committee. c
---Original message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:27 PM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Baytown: council pressured to enact tax freeze
Council pressured to enact tax freeze
By Kristopher Banks
Baytown Sun
Published October 27, 2004
BAYTOWN — City Council has until Dec. 31 to pass a freeze on property taxes for
senior citizens and the disabled if it is to affect the tax bills those homeowners
will pay in early 2006.
If they don't pass it, some citizens are threatening to take the matter into their
own hands.
several senior citizens showed up Tuesday because Council was scheduled to discuss
the freeze. In response, Mayor Calvin Mundinger said the matter would be on the
council's agenda to pass or defeat at their next meeting, Nov. 11.
The tax freeze was enabled by a state constitutional amendment approved by voters in
2003 with more than 80 percent of the vote.
The freeze would set property tax values and rates for those 65 and older and the
disabled on properties with a homestead exemption. The freeze cannot be revoked once
enacted.
Council first examined the freeze earlier this year, but if enacted, the freeze
would not go into effect until the beginning of the next year. Council has until the
end of the year to pass the freeze on values at the beginning of 2005, the tax bills
for which are paid in early 2006.
if Council does not enact the freeze soon, some citizens may force the matter to a
vote of the public. Carolyn Brumley and other area senior citizens are in the midst
of organizing a petition for an initiative, which would take the power away from
Council and put the matter before voters in a special election.
"we wish (Council) would pass it," she said. "It would make things easier."
The organizers are getting help from Steve Coycault, area representative for the
Silver Haired Legislature. The Silver Haired Legislature is a statewide or anization
that promotes senior issues. Coycault has been behind efforts to pass the freeze in
nearby cities, such as Pasadena and Seabrook, whose city councils passed the freeze.
"They should give the people who made the city what it is a break," said Coycault,
who attended Tuesday's meeting.
when Deer Park City Council would not pass the tax freeze, citizens passed an
initiative with 74 percent of the vote, Coycault said.
An initiative would require 5 percent of registered voters to sign a petition. The
city had about 33,000 registered voters in the last city election, although that
number could have gone up because of voter registration drives relating to the
Page 1
•
FW Baytown council
presidential election. If it has not,
signatures.
pressured to enact tax freeze
a petition would require about 1,650
An initiative for the tax freeze is not invincible. In.the city of windcrest, near
San Antonio, voters defeated an initiative with about 56 percent of the vote,
according to a city newsletter. So far, though, windcrest is alone, Jackson said.
There has not been organized opposition to the freeze within the city.
The Texas Municipal League, which assists city governments, does not take a side but
urges governments to use caution when approaching the matter. According to some
figures city administration gave to Council, the freeze might not have much of an
effect on most senior citizens.
The city offers a $50,000 property value exemption for seniors and the disabled
already. According to the city, 56 percent of those receiving that exemption pay
less than $100 in taxes.
To pay $100 with a homestead exemption and a senior citizen exemption, a home must
be worth about $80,000. The average home in Baytown is worth about $76,000.
According to the city, 38 percent of homeowners with the senior citizen or disabled
exemption pay no property taxes to the city at all.
The exemption would cost the city about $153,000 in the first year, a number
Mundinger noted is likely to grow.
But Mundinger said that he would support the measure.
"While campaigning, I said I would adopt (the tax freeze), and I plan on honoring
that statement," e said.
Councilman Mercedes Renteria III, who made the same statement while running for
mayor earlier this year, also said he would support the measure.
Page 2
•
Fw Rowlett senior tax freeze issue fails again
From: Alexander, Cynthia
sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 8:36 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: Rowlett: Senior tax freeze issue fails again
For audit committee. c
---original message -----
sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 1:03 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Rowlett: senior tax freeze issue fails again
senior tax freeze issue fails again
By: wendy Kay strain ,
Rowlett Lakeshore Times
10/21/2004
The issue was first brought before council in late July, as the council was going
into budget discussions and working to catch new councilmembers up on the CIP
(Capital Improvements Plan) process and reprioritize projects mentioned in the plan.
At that time, the issue was tabled until this week's meeting to give the council a
chance to focus on the budget, which had to be completed within a specific time
frame. Because a decision on the tax freeze for seniors wouldn't have gone into
effect until next year anyway, regardless if the decision was made in July or in May
2005, it was deemed to have less priority.
once again, the council chambers were full of seniors and others wishing to speak on
both sides of the issue.
Those speaking in favor of the issue listed such factors as fixed incomes of
seniors, rising costs of healthcare, medicines, groceries and other general living
expenses.
"My wife and I have lived in Rowlett for a long time," said one retired gentleman.
"we had social security and had CDs and felt our retirement was well taken care of.
we were fine for about ten years or so, but then we started to need doctors, taking
medications and going on supplemental insurance. -Our rates rose, our medical bills
rose and our CDs were bringing in less income than they were when we retired.
"My wife still volunteers for the city. The jobs she does saves the city the cost of
a full-time minimum wage worker. we're not asking for a salary for her, we're just
asking for a little help where we need it most."
Those speaking against the issue seemed to fall into two categories. Some were
against the issue simply because it was impossible to estimate how the numbers will
look in 10-20 years and therefore estimate the impact such a freeze might have to
the overall city budget.
"I'm not against a senior tax freeze," another man said. "I Just think we need to be
careful about how much of a freeze we give them. I realize they're on a fixed
income, but I still have to watch out for myself and the people who are younger than
I am. If the freeze is too large, we may get to a point where our younger people
can't afford it."
Others felt it was improper to ask younger families to shoulder the tax burdens of
older residents.
"I can't see putting the tax burden onto my children and their new baby," one man
said, not quite at the age of qualifying for any kind of senior relief. "I don't see
the logic in that."
Page 1
0
•
Fw Rowlett senior tax freeze issue fails again
After much similar comments from audience members, the council also took a turn at
speaking out on the issue.
Al Alberts, David Bryan and Shane Johnson spoke in favor of a freeze while Becky
Sebastian, Bruce Mahnken and Cindy Rushing spoke against the idea.
"Social security is not being fixed at the national level, so we should be able to
do something to help," Johnson said.
"I am not in favor of a tax freeze, but I would be interested in exploring other
options," Rushing said.
In the end, the council decided to go with Rushing's suggestion and explore other
options. The tax freeze itself failed, but the motion to table the issue for another
two weeks while city staff explores options such as offsetting valuation increases
with matching senior tax breaks within the city passed by a vote of 7-0.
The next city council meeting will be held on Nov. 9.
Page 2
•
•
New Braunfels county notes tax freeze could have larger impact - younger voters and business peo
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 8:43 AM
To: Green, Shannon
Subject: Fw: New Braunfels: county notes tax freeze could have larger
impact - younger voters and business people
For audit committee. c
---Original message -----
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 2:25 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: New Braunfels: county notes tax freeze could have larger impact - younger
voters and business people
Tax freeze could have larger impact
By Ron Maloney
The Herald-zeitung
Published October 22, 2004
If voters enact a tax freeze for seniors, county officials learned Thursday younger
voters and businesspeople will absorb even more of the impact than previously
thought.
And Precinct 2 Commissioner Jay Millikin, who has taken the point in opposing the
freeze, warned it could cut seriously into vital services if the county is to avoid
a potential rollback election.
under tax laws, voters can petition for a ballot to "rollback" a tax hike if it
increases the effective tax rate by more than 8 percent.
During the "comments" portion of the agenda, County Clerk Joy Streater noted heavy
voter turnout for the first three days of early voting.
"We've seen 4,940 voters so far — more than 800 from Garden Ridge Tuesday," Streater
said. "we're exceeding 1,300 every day."
In the 2000 presidential election, turnout was heavy on the first and last day of
early voting. what is different so far this year, streater said, is it hasn't
trailed off from a fast start.
"It's just unheard of," streater said.
Millikin noted heavy early voting turnout.
"Something is afoot if we have that many voters in one day in Garden Ridge," said
Millikin, former mayor of that city. "I grow increasingly concerned about
Proposition B ."
Proposition 13 was the constitutional amendment that would allow local governments
to freeze property taxes for seniors and disabled homeowners — or force them to do
it following a petitioned vote.
That question is this year Proposition 1 on both the city and county ballots.
Millikin said county counsel Geoff Barr warned him this week that, if passed, not
only property taxes would freeze, but the tax abatements now in place would be
locked in as well.
Comal county offers a 20 percent homestead abatement to all homeowners and an
additional $11,110 abatement to homeowners over age 65.
Page 1
�7
•
New Braunfels county notes tax freeze could have larger impact - younger voters and business peo
Reducing the abatements had been considered as a place to defray some of the lost
revenue. Millikin expressed surprise to learn that even if the county did that, the
result would still fall heavily on younger voters.
"we still have the opportunity to adjust the exemption for everyone else," county
Auditor David Renken said.
"That's true," Millikin agreed. "But the whole issue is tax equity."
County Judge Danny Scheel, who also opposes the freeze, said fairness is one of the
problems he has with it.
"If this exemption is taken from younger people, it just increases the inequity,"
Scheel said.
"There are those who surmise that if we can't pass it on to someone else, we can
Just freeze our budget," Millikin said. "Those people haven't sat here during a
budget hearing to see what that would mean. You say we can cut the budget. Tell me,
where do you want me to cut? Do we cut the road department? It will take longer to
get roads fixed. Do we cut public health? Is that acceptable? Do we cut the
sheriff's office? Less deputies mean longer response times. Do we want to close the
jail?"
Page 2
•
0
Green, Shannon
From:
Alexander, Cynthia
Sent:
Wednesday, September 15, 2004 3:40 PM
To:
Green, Shannon
Cc:
Feazelle, Debra; Joerns, John; Scott, Crystal
Subject:
FW: Friendswood: council approves plan for town center
For 4B Board next meeting (informational purposes only). C
Original Message
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 200412:51 AM
To: alexanderc@ci.la-porte.tx.us
Subject: Friendswood: council approves plan for town center
Council approves plan for town center
By Carolina Amengual
The Galveston County Daily News
Published September 15, 2004
FRIENDSWOOD — Members of the Main Street Steering Committee will soon start
putting a plan to redevelop downtown into action.
The city council unanimously approved Monday the committee's recommendations and
strategies to create a town center, an area expected to become the civic, cultural and
commercial hub.
Next, the committee will work to secure seed funding and establish a nonprofit entity
that will coordinate fund-raising and public relations.
The town center, which will be along South Friendswood Drive, bounded by
Shadowbend Avenue, Morningside Drive, Spreading Oaks Avenue and Laurel Drive,
will be comprised of homes, offices, restaurants, boutiques and public facilities.
The area will be marketed as a district and the town center as a specific site within
that district.
PageSoutherlandPage, the consultant, has determined that the best way to promote
redevelopment will be through a public private partnership.
While the private sector is expected to play a key role in the project, the city will make
an initial investment of $50,000.
The report prepared by PageSoutherlandPage also recommends using funds raised by
residents to make improvements to the future town center area. Enhancements could
include landscaping, sidewalks, fountains and signs. •
In the mid- to long-term, the project may require additional sources of funding, such as
the 4B Economic Development Sales Tax.
FUNDING
Potential funding needs and costs (estimate).
Year 1
Low: $150,000
High: $428, 500
Year 2
Low: $175, 000
High: $456, 000
Year 3
Low: $308,900
High: 936,000
Year 4
Low: $238,900
High: $1.5 million
Year 5
Low: $628,900
High: $1.8 million
— Source: City of Friendswood
FW Audit Fees
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 3:59 PM
To: Dolby, Michael; Green, Shannon
subject: FW: Audit Fees
Let's keep this so that we can make comparisons (after RFP is issued and proposals
received). C
---Original message -----
From: Glenn Windsor [mailto:gwindsor@deerparktx.org]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 9:12 AM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
subject: Audit Fees
Good Morning Cynthia:
Thank you for your response the other day! oh, I will not be going to
New York, but thanks for the offer on the entertainment side. I love New
York! I have run the NYC marathon 3 times and have been up there on
several other occasions. If you want some hints on good places to eat
let me know, but I'm sure you know the city pretty well too. If you are
there on a Sunday, you might want to catch the subway and make the
Brooklyn Tabernacle service. It is totally AWESOME! You have to get
there early to get a seat.
On the audit fees ................ .Sugar Land is $ 56,500 for 2003. They
implemented GASB 34 last year with a base audit fee of $ 47,725 and an
additional fee of $ 5,000 for GASB 34.
Rosenberg has a fee of $ 27,500 for each of the next three years; $
21,000 for the financial statements - including preparation, $ 3,750 for
single audit., if needed, and $ 2,750 for the Rosenberg Development
Corporation audit.
I had Roger's and managed to delete it. I have attempted to e-mail him
i
this morning but the e-mail s not going through. I have yet to hear
back from Webster or Missouri City.
would you happen to have Monica's e-mail address? It is not listed in
the directory. Thanks!
Glenn
Page 1
FW Audit Fee for This Year
From: Alexander, Cynthia
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 4:00 PM
To: Dolby, Michael; Green, Shannon
subject: Fw: Audit Fee for This Year
For audit folder. c
---Original message -----
From: Glenn Windsor[mailto:gwindsor@deerparktx.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 11:01 PM
To: Alexander, Cynthia
Subject: Audit Fee for This Year
Hi Cynthia! 41450 8300
we are -looking at the proposal from Null-Lairson for this next year and
would like to compare it to other cities. They are proposing a fee of $
41,450 and $ 8,300 for additional work due to GASB 34. Is that
comparable to your fee this next year and how much additional are y'all
looking at due to GASB 34?
Thank You! Hope all is well with you!
Glenn Windsor
Director of Finance
City of Deer Park, Texas
281.478.7225
gwindsor@deerparktx.org
Page 1