Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.04 Supplemental Audit RptsOF Dp�lJ� i9`;�12 STAFF REPORT CITY CLERK DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL File # ❑©�]®-3�� O�LIFOR��� DATE: January 18, 2011 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: - Joni Pattillo, City Manager SUBJEC : Supplemental Reports Prepared by the Auditors For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2010 Prepared By: Paul S. Rankin, Administrative Services Director. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In addition to the audit which is incorporated in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), the external auditors also prepare additional reports for the City. The CAFR was presented as part of the City Council Agenda on December 21, 2010. Caporicci and Larson (C&L), a subsidiary of Marcum, LLP, issued supplemental reports related to: Federal grant expenditures (Single Audit); Review of the Appropriations Limit Calculation; and Measure B Transportation Funds. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact identified in the Supplemental Reports, as the expenditures were in conformance with the program requirements. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the reports. L � v Submitted By: Reviewed Administrative Services Director Assistant C DESCRIPTION: anager On December 21, 2010 the City Council received the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2010. This report included audited financial statements reviewed by Caporicci and Larson, CPA's (C&L) a subsidiary of Marcum, LLP. The Auditors also prepared two specialized supplemental reports required by external grant guidelines. A third report is required under the California Government Code. The reports are briefly described below and attached for City Council review and acceptance. Page 1 of 2 ITEM NO. Single Audit Reports (Attachment 1) The City is required to obtain a Single Audit if annual expenditures of Federal Funds exceed $500,000. In the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2010 the City had $2,286,985 in expenditures of Federal Funds. The report includes a Report on Internal Control as well as a Report on Compliance. The findings resulted in no audit findings relative to the federal programs reported by the City. Alameda County Transportation Authority - Measure B Funds Report (Attachment 2) The Alameda County Transportation Authority provides local funding under two local programs. One is related to Street Improvements and the other is Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements. In addition the City completed a project on behalf of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, which was funded with Measure B Funds. The report found that, based on the information reviewed and presented, that the expenditures were materially in compliance with the program requirements. Appropriation Limit Schedule Report {Attachment 3) State law requires the adoption of an Appropriations Limit ("Limit") which must be included in the Budget document. The ~ity Council adopts the Limit by resolution and it is adjusted annually based on factors establish in State Law. The Limit applies only to appropriations that are funded by "proceeds of taxes". The Limit for the City of Dublin is substantially more than the amount of .revenue generated from taxes. The Auditors reviewed the calculation used to develop the $181,928,007 Limit as presented in the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Budget. There were no exceptions noted in the findings. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: A copy of the Single Audit Report will be filed with the State Controller by the March 31, 2011 deadline. A copy of the Measure B Report was submitted to the Alameda County Transportation Authority. ATTACHMENTS: 1. City of Dublin Single Audit Reports for the year ended June 30, 2010 2. City of Dublin - Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority: Measure B Funds (Financial Statements and Independent Auditor Reports for the year ended June 30, 2010) 3. City of Dublin Independent Accountants' Report on Agreed Upon Procedures Applied to Appropriations Limit Schedule (For the year ending June 30, 2010) Page 2 of 2 ~ ~ ~. ~__ ~.. ~^ (-_ r. ~ ~. ;_ . 1 O . l~ 111 Dublin, Calif ornia _, Single Audit Reports __ , For the year ended June 30, 2010 I ~ y.'~ 1-~~-11 ATTACHMENT 1 ~ a ~a~ City of Dublin ( , Single Audit Reports Table of Contents ~. , ( l` Pa~e Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on ( Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of , Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with l Government Auditing Standards .......................................................... ..............................................-:...................1 I__ , ~ Report on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to Each Major Program and Internal Control over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 ............................................. .................................................................. 3 l. Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards ....................................... .................................................................. 5 I, Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards ........................ ........................................ 6 .......................... • Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs ......................................... l.. c_~ ~.~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~_, ~_: f__l .............................:............................:....... 7 ~ _ ~-- . c&~. ( • Caporicci & Larson, Inc. I, A Substdiary of Marcum LLP Certified Public Accountants 3a ~~ REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council of the City of Dublin Dublin, California We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of Dublin (City) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2010, which collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements and have issued our report thereon dated December 13, 2010. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our audit procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's intemal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over financial reporting. A deftciency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies; in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity's financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that might be deficiencies, significant deficiencies, or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. . . www. c-Icpa. com ~ ai ~ I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council ~ of the City of Dublin Dublin, California I Page 2 ( Compliance and Other Matters l. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statemerits are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, f and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the I, determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The ( results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. ' I This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the City Council, others within the entity, and federal awarding agencies and pass=through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. ~~~, # ~~w~ ~r~. /~ San Francisco, California December 13, 2010 2 ~ C~L . Caporicci `& Larson, Inc. ( A Subsidiary of Marcum LLP l CertifzedPublicAccountants 5 a~ ~. REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AND INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OMB CIRCULAR A-133 To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council ( of the City of Dublin I . Dublin, California Compliance We have audited the compliance of City of Dublin (City), with the types of compliance requirements described in the U. S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement that are applicable to each of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2010. The City's major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditor's results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to .each of its major federal programs is the responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the City's compliance based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of S.tates, Local Governments, . and Non-Profit Organizations. Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about City's compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination of City's compliance with those requirements. In our opinion, the City complied, in all material respects, with the requirements referred to above that are applicable to each of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2010. Internal Control over Compliance Management of the City is responsible for establishing and maintaining. effective internal control over compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to federal programs. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over compliance with the requirements that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over compliance. A control deficiency in an entity's internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a ( control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned ~. functions; to prevent or detect noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. www.c-lcpa.com ~-. ~ a1 ~b _ To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council of the City of Dublin - Dublin, California Page 2 I. . A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. _; Schedule of Ex~enditures of Federal Awards ~ We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate ~~ remaining fund information of City of Dublin as of and for the year ended June, 30, 2010, and have issued our report thereon dated December 13, 2010. Our audit was performed for the purpose of forming our ( opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements. The 1... accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal aw~ds is presented for purposes of additiox~al analysis as. required by OMB Circular A-133 and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial I: statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, City Council, others within the ~~- City, federal awarding agencies, and pass-through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. ~.. ~ ~,~,, ~~. ~~` ~ , , San Francisco, California ~- ~ December 13, 2010 4' City of Dublin Single Audit Reports Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards For the year ended June 30, 2010 7 ~i ~ Program Name Federal Awards U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Passed through the Alameda County of Department of Housing £~ Community Development ADA Transifion Plan Community Development Block Grant Social Services Total U.S. Department of Hausing and Urban Development U.S. Deparhnent of Justice: Direct Programs Enforcement Services Passed through the Regents of the Uriiversity of California Click it or Ticket Program~ Total U.S. Department of Justice U.S. Department of Transportation Passed through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Total U.S. Department of Transportation Environmental ProtecHon Agency: • Direct Program Storm Drain Filters- ARRA Total U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Total Federal Expenditures * Denotes as Major Program. Catalog of Federal Grantor/ Domestic Pass-Through Entity Assistance Program Grant Number Number Expenditures 14.225 $ 36,760 14.218 63,322 ~ 100,082 2009-SBB9-0733 16.804 37,200 CT10119 / AL0995 20.600 26,391 CML 5432(013) 20.205 * 2,118,373 2,118,373 66.454 4,939 4,939 $ 2,286,985 5 g a~l City of Dublin ~ Single Audit Reports Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (-' For the Year Ended June 30, 2010 A. SUMMARY OF AUDIT RESULTS 1. The auditors' report expresses an unqualified opinion on the basic financial statements of the City of Dublin (City). ~ I 2. No significant deficiencies relating to internal control over financial reporting are reported. 3. No material weakness relating to internal control over financial reporting are reported. I 4. No instances of noncompliance material to the basic financial statements of the City were disclosed during the audit. ~ 5. No significant deficiencies relating to the audit of internal control over the major federal award ~ ' ro ams were identified or re orted. P S~' P 6. No material weaknesses relating to the audit of internal control over the major federal award ~~ . I programs are reported. 7. The auditors' report on compliance for the major federal award program for the City expresses an unqualified opinion. 8.~ No audit findings relative to the major federal award programs the City are reported. 9. The programs tested as major programs include: Majar Program F~alditt~es U.S. Department of Transpartation: Fed~al Crn~gestian Nfitig~tion and Air Quality $ 2,11$373 TotalMajorProgrunExpaiditures $ 211$373 TdalFeda~alF.xpenc~itures ~ $ . ~28Cz9ffi Percert of Total Fedeial Awaid Fxpenditures 9263% 8. The threshold for distinguishing Types A and B programs was $300,000. 9. The City of Dublin was determined to be a high risk auditee. 7 ~~ ~ ~ 1 O . 1~ 111 ~ Alameda County Transportation Improvem~ent Authority - Measure B Fu~1ds Dublin, Calif o:rnia ` Financial Statements and Independent Auditors' Reports For the year ended June 30, 2010 :ATTACHMENT 2 [- ~~ ~1 ~ i City of Dublin I' Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority - Measure B Funds Table of Contents Pa~e Independent Auditors' Report ..................................................................................................................................1 Financial Statements: Combined Balance Sheet ........................................................................................:..............................................2 Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances ..............................................................................................................................3 Notes to Financial Statements ......:............... .......................... ..........................................................................4 Independent Auditors' Report on Measure B Compliance :................................................................................6 (- ~ C I.. Caporicci & Larson, Inc. A Subsidiary of Marcum LLP Certified Public Accountants INDEPEIVDENT AUDITORS' REPORT l/ al To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council f, of the City of Dublin Dublin, California ~ We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Alameda County Transportation ( Improvement Authority - Measure B Funds (Measure B Funds) of the City of Dublin, California (City), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2010, as listed in the foregoing table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the management of the City. 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 Governinent 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 consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for l- designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing' an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we ( express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the l~ .. amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and the 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. i As described in Note 1, the financial statements present only the Measure B Funds and are not intended to, ~ and do not, present fairly the financial position of the City as of June 30, 2010, and the changes in fund f balances thereof for the years then ended iri conformity with general accepted accounting principles in the United States. - In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Measure B Funds of the City as of June 30, 2010, and the results of its operations and changes in fund balance for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the Uniteci States. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report as of and for the year ended June 30, 2010, dated December 13, 2010,' on our consideration of the City's internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing on internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report 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 audits. ss.~ ~ L<l't,d~`+`~~ ~~- • San Francisco, California December 13, 2010 www. c-Icp a. com 'O~ 0~ ` ~ City of Dublin Alameda Counfy Transportation Improvement Authority - Measure B Funds Combined Balance Sheet June 30, 2010 Special RevenueFunds Measure B Measure B Bike and Local Pedestrian I-580 Auxiliary Streets Pathway Lanes (ACCMA) Total ASSETS Cash and 'uivestments $ 245,164 $ 482,714 $ - $ 727,878 Accounts receivable. 411,185 16,682 - 427,867 Total assets $ 656,349 $ 499,396 $ - $ 1,155,745 LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES Liabilities: Accounts payable $ - $ - $ - $ - Contract retention payable - - - - Total liabilities - - - - Fund Balances: Unreserved: Designated for capital projects 656,349 499,396 - 1,155,745 Total fund balances 656,349 499,396 - 1,155,745 Total liabilities and , fund balances $ 656,349 $ 499,396 $ - $ 1,155,745 See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements. 2 I~ ~~ ~ ( City of Dublin ' I Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority - Measure B Funds Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the year ended June 30, 2010 1 ~` , Special Revenue Funds ~ ` Measure B Measure B Bike and Local Pedestrian I-580 Auxiliary ~ SEreets Pathway Lanes (ACCMA) Total _. REVENUES: Taxes other than property $ 294,476 $ 104,135 $ - $ 398,611 ` -~ Interest 23,783 11,305 - 35,088 Reimbursement - - 1,726,156 1,726,156 Total revenues ~_ 318,259 115,440 1,726,156 2,159,855 EXPENDITURES: ~ Capital outlay: " _ Streets, bike and pedestrian projects 510,978 60,830 - 571,808 I-580 ACCMA Auxiliary Lanes - - 1,726,156 1;726,156 Total operating expenditures 510,978 60,830 1,726,156 2,297,964 ~_ OTHER FINANCING (USES) Transfer out 20,739 - - 20,739 f Total other financing (uses) l_... 20,739 - - 20,739 REVENUES OVER (UNDER) I EXPENDITURES {__. (213,458) 54,610 - (158,B48) FUND BALANCES: I~ Begimling of year, as restated 869,807 444,786 - 1,314,593 End of year $ ~. . 656,349 $ 499,396 $ - $ 1,155,745 l__ ~ ~ _._ 1__ See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements. ~_-. 3 i ~~ ~ City of Dublin ~ Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority - Measure B Funds Notes to Financial Statements (~ For the year ended June 30, 2010 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES Reporting Entity - All transactions of the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority - Measure B Funds (Measure B Funds) of the City of Dublin, California (City), are included as separate special revenue funds in the basic financial statements of the City. Measure B Funds are used to account for the City's share of revenues earned and expenditures incurred under the City's streets and roads,. and bike and pedestrian programs. The accompanying financial statements are for Measure B Funds only and are not intended to fairly present the financial position of the City and the results of its operations and cash flows of its proprietary fund type. Basis of Accounting - The accompanying financial statements are prepared on the modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are generally recorded when measurable and available, and expenditures are recorded when the'related liabilities are incurred. The accounting and financial reporting treatment applied to a fund is determined by its measurement focus. All governmental funds are accounted for using a"current financial resources" measurement focus, wherein only current assets and current liabilities,,generally are included on the balance sheets. Operating statements.of governmental funds present increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. Description of Funds - The accounts are maintained on the basis of fund accounting. A fund is a separate accounting entity with a self-balancing set of accounts. The following fund type is used: Special Revenue Funds - To account for the proceeds of specific revenues that are legally restricted to be expended for specified purposes. 2. CASH AND INVESTMENTS Cash and investments are maintained on a pooled basis with those of other funds of the City. Pooled cash and investments consist of U.S. government securities, deposits with banks, mutual funds and participation in the California Local Agency Investment Fund. All investments are stated at fair value. Pooled investment earnings are allocated monthly based on the average monthly cash and investment balances of the various funds and related entities of the City. . See the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for disclosures related to cash and investments and the related custodial risk categorization. This may be obtained from the City of Dublin, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California 9456$. - [ 15 ~~I ` - City of Dublin ~ Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority - Measure B Funds Notes to Financial Statements, Continued (-- For the year ended June 30, 2010 3. MEASURE B FUNDS Under Measure B, approved by the voters of Alameda County in 1986 (Old Measure B) and in 2000, ACTIA Measure $, the City receives a portion of the proceeds of an additional one-half cent sales tax to be used for transportation-related expenditures. This measure was adopted with the intention that the funds generated by the additional sales tax will not fund expenditures previously paid for by property taxes but, rather, would be used for additional projects and programs. Local projects funded by Measure B were as follows: Street Resur acingPro'e~ cts - To place overlays on various streets throughout the City. Bicycle and Pedestrian Sa{et~ - To fund various bicycle and pedestrian safety projects throu'ghout the City. From a pool of funds held by the County, 16.77 percent of the pool is allocated among the cities in the County, based on the cities' populations and the number of roads within their city limits for other transportation-related projects. Funds allocated for streets and roads; bike lanes and pedestrian lanes are recorded as a special revenue funds. Regional capital projects not using Local Funds, being constructed under contract administered by the City of Dublin were as follows: , West Bound I-580 Auxiliary Lanes Project - A Measure B Project sponsored by Alameda County Congestion Management Agency and being constructed by the City of Dublin. The Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (ACCMA) is the project sponsor of the I-580 Auxiliary Lane Project included in the Alameda County 2000 Measure B Expenditure Plan, approved by the Alameda County voters in November 2000. The ACCMA, in collaboration with the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority (ACTIA) requested that the City of Dublin construct the I-580 Westbound Auxiliary Lane between Fallon Road and Tassajara Road, in conjunction with the City's I-580/Fallon Road Interchange Improvement project to ensure consistency between tlie two projects. On June 2, 2009, the City Council approved a Fund Transfer Agreement between the City of Dublin and the ACCMA which established a limit of reimbursement to $2,450,000. The City's expenditure is subject to reimbursement from ACCMA through Measure B funds provided by ACTIA. 4. INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS Interfund transfers for the year ended June 30, 2010 were as follows: `~ Transfer in: Transfer out: Gas Sales Fund Total Measure B Fund 20,739 20,739 1 Total 20,739 20,739 ~ A transfer from the Measure B Local Streets and Road fund to the Gas Tax fund was recorded to readjust the interest income reported in the 2009 report. C~L Caporicci & Larson, Inc. A Subsidiary of Marcum LLP l Certified Public Accountants INDEPENDEIVT AUDITORS' REPORT ON MEASURE B COMPLIANCE To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council of the City of Dublin Dublin, California !(~ I `~ ~ We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority - Measure B Funds (Measure B Funds) of the City of Dublin, California (City), as of f, and for the year ended June 30, 2010, and have issued our.report thereon dated December 13, 2010. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards in the United States and ( standards applicable to financial audits contained in Goverrtment 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. Compliance with laws and regulations, contracts and grants applicable to the City is the responsibility of City management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of City compliance with Measure B grant regulations as specified in the agreement befween the City and Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority for the year ended June 30, 2010. Under Measure B, approved by the voters of Alameda County in 2000, the City has received under ACTIA Measure B a total of 12 months of revenue from July 2009 through June 2010. The Local Street and Roads program has received $294,476, and the Bike and Pedestrian program has received $104,135. This financial statement reflects twelve months of revenue for the Local Sireets and Roads, and the Bike and Pedestrian programs. In our opinion the City of Dublin is materially in compliance witli the laws and regulations, contracts and grant requirements related to Measure B 2000 funds as specified in the agreement between the City and Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority. Our opinion is covering the period from July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010. . This report is intended for the information of the City Council, management, and the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority. , However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. ssti ~ ~~~ ~~-. San Francisco, California December 13, 2010 ~ wcvw.c-Icpa.com ~ ~ ATTACHMENT 3 f- ~ CL Caporicci & Larson Certified Public Accountants ~ ( l INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTAN'TS' REPORT' ON LIMITED PROCEDURES ~ REVIEW OF APPROPRIATION LIMIT UNDER ARTICLE XIIIB r-~ OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council ( of the City of Dublin Dublin, California ~g l ~ We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit Schedule of the City of Dublin (City) for the fiscal ending June 30, 2010. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City of Dublin and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed-upon Procedures Applied to the Approprialions Limitation Prescribed by Article XIII-B of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist you in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIII-B of the California Constitution. The City management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit Schedule. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no representatiori regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or any other purpose. The procedures performed and our findings are described below: 1. We obtained the completed worksheets used by the City to calculate its appropriations limit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, and determined that the limit and annual calculation factors were adopted by resolution of City Council. We also determined that the population and inflation options were selected by a recorded vote of the City Council. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit Schedule, we added the prior year's limit to the total adjustments, and agreed the resulting amount to the current year's limit. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 3. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Schedule to corresponding information in worksheets used by the City. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented ui the accompanying Appropriations Limit Schedule to the prior year appropriations limit adopted by the C~ty Council during the prior year. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. Toll Free Ph: (87'~ 862-2200 Oakland Orange County 180 Grand Ave., Suite 1365 9 Corporate Park, Suite 100 Oakland, California 94612 Irvine, California 92606 Toll Free Fax~(86G) 436-0927 Sacramento San Diego 777 Campus Commons Rd., Suite 200 4858 Mercury, Suite 106 Sacremento, California 95825 San Diego, California 92111 J To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council . of the City of Dublin ~ Dublin, California Page 2 ~~ ~~. We were not engaged to and did not conduct an examination; the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the, accompanying Appropriation Limit Schedule. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriation limit for the base year, as defined by Article XIII-B of the California Constitution. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council and" management of the City and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. ~ ~~,~~ ~ ~~`. Oakland, California December 21, 2009 2 - City of Dublin Appropriations Limit Schedule For the year ending June 30, 2010 A. Appropriations limit FY 2008-2009 B. Calculation Factors: 1. Population increase % 2. Inflation increase % 3. Total adjustment factor % C. Annual Adjustment Increase D. Other Adjustments: Lost responsibility (-) Transfers to private (-) Transfers to fees (-) Assumed responsibility (+) E. Total Adjustments F. Appropriations limit FY 2009-2010 Arnount $ 170,632,158 1.0315 1.0336 1.0662 11,295,849 11,295,849 $ 181,928,007 ~ ~~ a~ Source Prior year schedule State Departrnent of Finance Alameda County Assessor B1 * B2 [(B3-1)*A)] N/A N/A N/A N/A ~C+D) ~A+E) ~ 3 I~: City of Dublin Notes to Appropriations Limit Schedule ~ For the year ending June 30, 2010 1. PURPOSE OF LIMITED PROCEDURES REVIEW al a~ Under Article XIIIB of the California Constitution (Gann Spending Limitation Initiative), California governmental agencies are restricted as to the amount of annual appropriations from proceeds of taxes. Effective for years beg'u~ning on or after July .1, 1990, under Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB, the annual calculation of the appropriations limit is subject to a limited procedures review in connection with the annual audit. 2. METHOD OF CALCULATION Under Section 10.5 of Article XIIIB, for fiscal years beg'ulning on or after July 1990, the appropriations limit is required to be calculated based on the limit for the fiscal year 1986-87, adjusted for the.inflation and population factors discussed in Notes 3 and 4 below. I _. r- ~ 3. INFLATION FACTORS A California governmental agency may adjust its appropriations limit by either the annual percentage change in the 4th quarter per capita personal income (which percentage is supplied by the State Department of Finance) or the percentage change in the local assessment roll from the preceding year due to the change of local nonresidential construction. The factor adoptecl by the City of Dublin for the fiscal year 2009-20.10 represents the change of local nonresidential construction. 4. POPULATION FACTORS A California goverrunental agency may adjust its appropriations limit by either the annual percentage change. of the jurisdictiori s own population or the annual percentage change in population of the County where the jurisdiction is located. The factor adopted by the City of Dublin for fiscal year 2009-2010 represents the population change in the City of Dublin: . 5. OTHER ADJUSTMENTS A California government agency may be required to adjust its appropriations limit when certain events occur, such as the transfer of responsibility for municipal services to, or from, another government agency or private entity. The City of Dublin had no such adjustments for the year ending June 30, 2010. 4