Tonight, town staff will update the Oro Valley Town Council on financial results by fund for the year ended June 30. We provided a glimpse of what the year’s results would look like a few weeks ago. This was based on staff estimates from May results. Here’s that posting. Below is a look at what staff is expected to report tonight, and how it compares to what we wrote just a short time ago.
General Fund: Less use of reserves than planned
Revenues ended the year just under plan at 99% of budget. Construction sales tax remained well below expectations, partly offset by restaurant, bar, and bed tax revenues and strong interest earnings. Expenditures came in under budget, so about $1.1 million of fund balance was used versus $4.1 million budgeted. The General Fund ended with a balance of approximately $21.0 million, about $6.4 million above the Town’s 30% policy reserve.
Compared to May: May’s estimate suggested a $2.3 million use of fund balance. Final results were stronger, with less drawn from reserves than anticipated.
Highway revenues finished essentially on budget. Highway User Revenue Fund receipts and interest earnings were slightly short, but right-of-way permits and insurance recoveries offset the difference. Spending came in about 8% below budget due to the delay of the Shannon Road project. The fund closed with a balance of roughly $1.47 million.
Compared to May: The May projection was about $1.48 million. Actual results matched the estimate almost exactly.
Community Center Fund: Golf rounds and dues drove stronger revenues
Revenues were stronger than planned, exceeding budget by about $1.4 million. Golf rounds reached 111,115 through June (up 8.2% year over year). Member dues and food and beverage sales were also higher. Expenses ran over budget, mainly due to labor, utilities, and credit card fees. Even so, the fund added about $1.1 million to its balance, finishing at roughly $2.98 million.
Compared to May: May projected a $750,000 addition and a $2.6 million ending balance. Actual results were about $400,000 better.
Capital Fund: Spending delayed, balance preserved
Sources came in above budget by about $513,000, including a $1 million grant for the Naranja Park pump track and skatepark. Spending was well below the $10.3 million budget as several projects rolled into the next fiscal year. The Capital Fund ended with a balance near $16.8 million, slightly higher than its beginning balance of $16.7 million.
Compared to May: May projected an $11.7 million ending balance. Actual results were much stronger, reflecting added grant revenue and delayed project spending.
Water Utility Fund: Surplus smaller than expected
Revenues beat budget by roughly $957,000, helped by water sales, service charges, interest earnings, and an unbudgeted Water Infrastructure Finance Authority (WIFA) grant. Expenses were about 10% below budget due to vacancies, lower CAP water charges, and reduced system maintenance. Even with savings, transfers out and debt service brought the year-end balance to about $7.3 million.
Compared to May: May projected an ending balance of $15.5 million. June actuals came in lower, reflecting higher transfers and project spending than anticipated in May.
Stormwater Fund: FEMA Grant received, project costs lower
Revenues finished slightly above plan, including a $210,000 FEMA grant for the Sierra Wash project. Spending was well under budget: the Oro Valley Drive drainage project was delayed, and Sierra Wash is estimated at about $380,000 versus $735,000 budgeted. The fund ended with a balance near $1.28 million.
Compared to May: May projected about $1.3 million. Actual results closed lower because more spending was recognized by year-end than had been expected in May.
Overall: Delayed spending increased fund balances over plan
Overall, the Town’s six major funds ended the fiscal year with balances stronger than budgeted, though not all matched the May estimates. The differences reflect timing more than performance. Revenues in several areas—especially construction sales tax—came in below plan. But less-than-planned spending—often due to project delays or vacancies—left more money on the books at year-end. This does not signal greater efficiency or fiscal restraint. It reflects cash-basis accounting, where work may be completed and payment made in the following year.
- - -
