2013-01-16 Finance Committee MinutesFINANCE COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAINT JOHN
MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 16, 2013 - 4:30 p.m.
Present:
Councillor Merrithew
Councillor Strowbridge
Councillor Reardon
Councillor MacKenzie
Councillor Fullerton
Greg Yeomans
Cathy Graham
Kevin Fudge
Hilary Nguyen
Lloyd Foote — Deloitte
Roger Bastarache — Ernst & Young
Cathy Munroe — Ernst & Young
Also present — Barbara Mahaffy, Recording Secretary
Mr. Yeomans noted that he had a report prepared to go to Council, from the Committee,
signed by Councillor Merrithew, as Chair of the Committee. It would be put on the agenda
for January 28t ", if this Committee is in agreement with that.
Audit Results (December 31, 2011)
Mr. Bastarache reviewed the contents of the report with the Committee. He summarized
their mandate and the various services that they offer to the City and various opinions that
they provided on various funds, expenditure report and status update. Ernst & Young
needs a letter of representation from management, but otherwise, the audit is complete.
He highlighted some of the focus areas of the audit —
• Balance due to Pension and Pension expense — cause of delay in reporting
of statements;
• Capital projects in progress — various federal and provincial agreements.
Reports have been issued related to the Gas Tax and Harbour Clean Up
fund;
• Claim of lien by Pomerleau Inc. for $7.3 million — came in on January 9t" — no
impact on general fund, no further disclosure is required. Pomerleau would
settle for $450,000 — amount not material.
Materiality was 1 % of budget. It is in financial statements as note of disclosure.
Mr. Bastarache talked about fraud considerations and the risk of management override.
No issues have been identified.
Concerning the summary of audit differences (SAD), there was nothing found that would
have an impact on the operations of the City. The reclassification misstatements were
reviewed.
Ernst & Young's fee schedule was reviewed. They are in accordance with the
engagement letter that was signed. The auditor's responsibilities under the auditing
standards were explained. There was no significant change in planned scope and timing
from the previous year.
He briefly reviewed the critical accounting policies and practices. During the year, there
were no changes in accounting principles by the City and no unusual transactions
recorded by the City. There were no disagreements with Management.
In regards to fraud and illegal acts, Mr. Bastarache asked the Committee if they know of or
are aware of any illegal acts or amounts that may impact the statements in any way. Mr.
Yeomans noted that any information of fraud should be communicated to the auditors.
Members of this Committee and staff are obligated to report fraud.
Other written communication that the auditors have had with the City includes the
engagement letter, independence letter and summary of unrecorded audit differences.
The auditors will provide copies of the management representation letter.
Mr. Bastarache reviewed independence matters and subsequent events review. This
review revealed the lien from Pomerleau in January. There were no related party
transactions that they were aware of.
There are copies of the proposed audit report, which need to be approved and signed by
Common Council. Mr. Yeomans noted that the proposed audit report will be attached to
the draft statements taken to Council. The audit report is not signed until after it goes to
Council and is approved by them.
A question was asked concerning additional audit fees that will be billed separately. Ms.
Munroe estimated that it would represent approximately 40 hours of extra time ($10-
15,000 range).
In response to a question from the Committee, the 2011 financial statements should be
posted to the website by mid - February (Feb. 14).
Staff left the meeting at 4:50 pm to allow the Committee to have an in- camera session with
the auditors and returned to the meeting at 5:00 pm.
2
2011 Audited Financial Statements — Review
General Fund
This review will give a snapshot of the overall financial situation of the City.
Mr. Fudge looked at the Surplus before Pension figures. The going- concern payments
have had a major impact on the financial position of the City. Overall, for 2011, excluding
Special Pension Funding, the City came in at approximately $3 million in surplus versus
the budget.
The surplus is a result of $800,000 in Wages & Benefits due to vacancies and retirements;
about $860,000 in surplus from lower debt service cost than anticipated; $800,000
actuarial adjustments for fringe benefits (Heart & Lung, retirement allowance, etc.). Ms.
Nguyen responded to a question about the lower debt service cost. It is a combination of
low interest rates and borrowing less. The interest rate on the special loan from FCM is
2 %.
Ms. Nguyen reviewed fiscal charges as they relate to interest and principle. It is a
provincial requirement that principle and interest repayments are part of the fiscal charges.
Overall, for the year, there is a surplus of $3 million; however, $3 million more was paid to
pension funding than was anticipated, leaving the City with a deficit of $73,000.
Concerning pension funding — the City did receive $3.5 million deferral approval from the
province.
Mr. Fudge reviewed the General Operating Revenue Analytical Review noting that there
was total revenue of $139 million. He identified anything that was over $100,000 in
variance. The first variance to note is in Administrative Services. Building Permits fell
short of budget by $155,000 due to slower than expected growth in the economy. Short
Term interest revenue was higher than expected. Miscellaneous revenue is a variance of
$2.1 million to the good.
Miscellaneous revenue is predominantly made up of Police achieved revenue for
Secondments and Extra Duty Service amounting to about $1 million. Police are over
budget for wages and benefits but that is offset by revenues recorded in miscellaneous
revenue. The City also received a UDA refund (refundable component of group life
insurance plan based on plan experience) of $127,000.
Mr. Fudge reviewed the wages and benefits variances. Overall, there was a $765,000
surplus in wages and benefits. He made note of the reasons for this surplus - various
vacancies resulted in a $500,000 surplus in General Administration; less casual costs than
budgeted, the retirement of Senior Manager and a vacant position resulted in a $200,000
surplus in Recreation and Cultural wages and benefits; Police protection over budget but
this is offset by Extra -Duty Officer revenue and Secondment revenue resulting in a surplus
of $52,000. One offsets the other.
3
The operating expenses (excluding wages & benefits) were presented. Major variances
included - Road salt was $600,000 over budget due to a longer and more frequent winter
activity than anticipated; Fuel had a deficit of $236,000 — more usage due to long winter
and price of fuel higher than anticipated; Fleet parts in deficit position of $564,000 due to
aging fleet and infrastructure requiring more parts for repair and maintenance; Road work
is seasonal — late start to season due to weather - $643,000 surplus; Building rentals —
Market Square common area below budget by $163,000; Professional services had
surplus of $288,000 — less spent on storm drainage analysis and City Manager's office
budget experienced a surplus; Training and travel under spent throughout organization
resulting in surplus of $293,000; Debt service — due to lower debenture interest rates,
lower bank rates, borrowed less than expected. Debenture interest was issued at 3 -4%
resulting in savings of $344,000. Less borrowing resulted in lower debenture discounts of
$160,000; Transit debt service — delay in borrowing, lower debenture interest rates,
different payment structure resulted in $274,000 surplus.
Before Pension funding, the overall operating expenses, excluding wages and benefits
were in a surplus of $1.2 million; however, once pension funding brought in, there is a
deficit of $1.9 million.
Mr. Fudge reviewed the operating expenses by service (excluding wages and benefits).
Major variances included — General Administration — overall surplus of $521,000. Most
costs down and below budget; Protective services — overall surplus of $391,000;
Transportation services — overall deficit of $1.2 million — road salt, fuel, fleet parts over
budget; Environmental Development — overall $643,000 surplus.
Pension funding is a large part of the City's operating expenses.
The Operating and Capital Fund Balance Sheet was reviewed. In the Operating Fund
balance sheet, there is no cash as the City was in an overdraft position at year end;
Accounts Receivables were down due to timing of the bills; $600,000 more in accruals
than in prior year; Trade receivables were consistent year over year.
There is an $8.4 million deferral on the operating fund balance sheet. This represents two
different pension deferrals received. In 2010, City received approval from the Province to
defer $4.9 million in pension funding to be amortized over 10 years and in 2011, City
received approval to amortize $3.5 million in pension funding over seven years. These
payments have been made from a cash perspective.
The Long -Term Receivable on the balance sheet is in reference to the UDA.
Under Liabilities, there is a bank overdraft; accounts payable and accrued liabilities —
vehicle expenditures occurred near end of year; fleet replacement fund — purchases
throughout the year reduced the reserve; $8.4 million long -term debt - Special Pension
Loan from 2007 — final payment due in 2012. There is $1.6 million remaining in the long-
term debt.
On the Capital Fund Balance Sheet, there is a large Accounts Receivable associated with
Gas Tax funding received at the end of the year - $10.5 million; Capital Assets - $37
million in new capital spending in 2011, with $8.6 million funded by Provincial and Federal
sources.
0
Under Liabilities on the Capital Fund balance sheet, there is a bank loan representing
outstanding Bridge financing of $10 million; Debenture debt — ending balance for 2011 is
$102.5 million; deferred contributions — relates to Gas Tax proceeds that were unspent at
the end of 2011.
Ms. Nguyen reviewed the Long -Term Debt. According to the Municipalities Act, the
maximum annual borrowing in the General Fund is 2% of assessed value of real
properties; cumulative borrowing — the maximum is 6% of assessed value of real
properties. The City is well below the threshold. In 2011, the current year borrowings are
at 0.60% of assessment value of property — the maximum is 2 %. The total outstanding
debt as a percent of assessment base is 1.94% - the City is allowed to have up to 6 %.
The City's debt service ratio is stable at 9 -10 %. The City is doing a good job of managing
their debt. By the end of 2011, the City has almost doubled the debt they had in 2007.
Part of the reason for this doubling of the debt is due to very aggressive capital budgets
from 2007 -2009. The City cannot satisfy its needs without looking at affordability. In 2010,
a 10 -year financial forecast was produced to determine how much the City can borrow
without increasing the debt significantly. Capital expenditures were reined in from 2010 to
the present. New capital spending was capped at $10 -11 million, which, over time, will
help to stabilize the City's borrowing. A debt service ratio less than 15% is OK with the
Province.
Ms. Graham noted that stimulus funding had to be for projects that we were not planning to
do. This added another burden onto the City. As a result, the City had to undertake
projects that were five years out that were not in the capital funding; it did not help the City
with the projects that were on the books and needed to be done right away. Mr. Yeomans
noted that the Gas Tax was also to be used on new projects and not existing projects. The
federal government, as a result, is diverting where we spend our money, as well.
Councillor Fullerton expressed the desire to have incentives developed for the
Commissioners and Managers of the City to encourage them to save money. Mr.
Yeomans spoke to surpluses in the budget — if there is a significant surplus in the budget,
the question must be asked — what did the City not deliver to taxpayers that they were told
that the City was going to deliver.
Mr. Fudge responded to a question about inter - company accounts. The auditors review
these accounts specifically. There are accounting guidelines that stipulate that these
accounts must be cleared annually by December 31.
The deferred pension expense noted under Assets in the Financial Statements represents
the deferral of 2010 & 2011 from the province — this has been paid. This is the deferral of
the expense. The City of Saint John Pension Fund noted to under Liabilities and Equity in
the Financial Statements refers to payments for October, November and December based
on the extrapolated actuarial balance for the 2011 pension liability. This has been paid in
2012.
The Accounts Receivable in 2011 under Assets includes Gas Tax funding of $10 million;
hence the large discrepancy from 2010 to 2011.
It was noted that PSA will make changes to financial reporting that will allow the City to
report the value of their assets more accurately.
Water and Sewerage Utility
There was surplus of $43,000 for the year in the Utility Operating Fund and is the result of
the $116,000 surplus in wages & benefits (retirements and vacancies) and operating
expenses of $769,000, a result of a surplus in debt service, chemicals and chlorine and
administration charges from the General Fund. Special Pension Funding exceeded
budget by approximately $825,000.
Under the Revenue Review, metered water revenue had less consumption than budgeted
for. Under Miscellaneous revenue, there was a surplus of $209,000 in interest revenue —
interest was higher than expected — as well as a surplus in water department fees of
$97,000.
Under Wages & Benefits Review — over budget in Water Supply by $174,000, due to
unplanned emergency repairs and emergency call -ins. This was offset by surpluses in
sewerage services ($180,000) and Administration ($104,000), due to retirements &
vacancies.
Under Operating Expense Review (by type of expenditure) - $769,000 surplus; chlorine
and chemicals make up $220,000; general fund administration charge to the utility -
$243,000; mechanical components - trimmed spending by $70,000, due to inexpensive
repair solutions being identified and planned work not completed saving $50,000;
professional services had surplus of $103,000 — project and road reconstruction work
delayed until 2012 — impact of $63,000; provincial water supply — operated longer than
expected resulting in deficit of $92,000; insurance deductible — provisions for outstanding
insurance claims made in 2011 - $220,000.
Capital assets purchased from the operating fund totaling $6.4 million are part of the All
Other category shown on the operating expense review (by expenditure) ($12.8 million).
Mr. Fudge reviewed the overall spending for the year 2011, noting that the utility debt
service is very substantial. The Municipalities Act recognizes that and there are no debt
service levels on infrastructure for the utility. It is a very capital intensive utility.
The balance sheets of the utility operating and capital fund were reviewed. Accounts
receivable declined by $1 million from prior year, mostly due to reduction in timing of
sending invoices out; long -term receivable reduction due to $22,000 of UDA refunded to
the Utility. On Liabilities side, accounts payable increased $344,000. On the Capital Fund
balance sheet, Accounts Receivable were reduced by $3 million, due to Large Receivables
for Stimulus grants in 2010, paid in 2011 - $6.8 million for Harbour Clean Up and $1.6
million receivable for MRIF Infrastructure funding; capital assets — spent $44 million in new
capital in 2011 - $18 million funded by provincial and federal sources. Under Liabilities,
accounts payable and accrued liabilities - $8.7 million accrual for Eastern Waste Water
Treatment Plant, with $300,000 accrual for Spruce Lake Water Treatment Facility;
0
Debenture Debt - $61.5 million in long -term debt at end of 2011; deferred contributions -
$1.5 million held in trust for Harbour Clean Up funding.
Ms. Nguyen reviewed the Utility long -term debt and noted that the outstanding balance of
debt went from $45 million in 2007 to $61 million in 2011. The City is still dealing with
Harbour Clean Up, of which the City's share is $39 million overall — Federal $26.6 million,
Province $26.6 million. By the end of 2011, only a portion of Harbour Clean Up is
showing. The City will not see the full impact of Harbour Clean Up until 2013 or 2014. The
biggest component is the Waste Water Treatment Plant, which was completed in 2011. In
2011, the City had a Stimulus Fund Program into which the Federal and Provincial
governments contributed money to fund water projects — overall cost - $23 million — of
which one third is the City's share.
The debt service costs as a percent of total expenses have been stable; however, this will
increase in the future due to taking on safe, clean drinking water project. This will have a
significant impact on the rates as Harbour Clean Up is still ongoing, as well. The City
needs to be careful managing this going forward.
There was a discussion on the costs of the safe, cleaning drinking water project.
Mr. Fudge addressed a question concerning Billings & Collections and why the actual was
higher than was budgeted. The auditors went through old account receivables and made
an allowance to offset these accounts in the event that the City doesn't recover the money
— is listed as bad debt but the City is still trying to collect them.
Reserve & Trust Funds
The Reserve & Trust Funds are money that people over the years have donated for
different purposes. Mr. Yeomans explained that the City cannot use the money for
anything but what the proceeds of the trust are. These funds are very restrictive. The City
administers them, but has no authority over them.
Mr. Yeomans presented the letter for Councillor Merrithew to sign on behalf of the Finance
Committee which will go to Common Council, approving the various statements as
presented. The auditors will be present at this meeting and will speak to the audit. Mr.
Fudge and Ms. Nguyen will also be present to answer any questions. If approved at this
meeting, these statements will go to the meeting on January 28, 2013.
Moved by Councillor MacKenzie
Seconded by Councillor Reardon
THAT the audited financial statements of the City of Saint John General Fund,
Water and Sewerage Utility and the Reserve and Trust Funds for the year ended
December 31, 2011 be approved as presented.
CARRIED
7
The meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m.
Chairperson