AC 12-13-2021 Searchable PacketCITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE
AGENDA
This will be a teleconference meeting without a physical location .
Monday, December 13, 2021
4:00 PM
Special Meeting
TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION TO HELP STOP THE
SPREAD OF COVID-19
In accordance with Government Code 54953(e), this will be a teleconference meeting
without a physical location to help stop the spread of COVID-19.
Members of the public wishing comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the
following ways:
1) E-mail comments by 2:00 p.m. on Monday, December 13 to the Audit Committee at
AuditCommittee@cupertino.org. These e-mail comments will be received by the Audit
Committee members before the meeting and posted to the City’s website after the meeting.
2) E-mail comments during the times for public comment during the meeting to the Audit
Committee at AuditCommittee@cupertino.org. The staff liaison will read the emails into
the record, and display any attachments on the screen, for up to 3 minutes (subject to the
Chair’s discretion to shorten time for public comments). Members of the public that wish to
share a document must email AuditCommittee@cupertino.org prior to speaking.
3) Teleconferencing Instructions
Members of the public may observe the teleconference meeting or provide oral public
comments as follows:
Oral public comments will be accepted during the teleconference meeting . Comments may
be made during “oral communications” for matters not on the agenda, and during the
public comment period for each agenda item .
To address the Audit Committee, click on the link below to register in advance and access
the meeting:
Register in advance for this webinar:
https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_IKRIyixbSnC_ShUQfQXZAw
Page 1
1
Audit Committee Agenda December 13, 2021
Phone
Dial: 669-900-6833 and enter Webinar ID: 950 1869 5272 (Type *9 to raise hand to speak, *6 to
unmute yourself). Unregistered participants will be called on by the last four digits of their
phone number.
Or an H.323/SIP room system:
H.323:
162.255.37.11 (US West)
Meeting ID: 950 1869 5272
SIP: 94164589868@zoomcrc.com
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about
joining the webinar.
Please read the following instructions carefully:
1. You can directly download the teleconference software or connect to the meeting in your
internet browser. If you are using your browser, make sure you are using a current and
up-to-date browser: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain
functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer .
2. You will be asked to enter an email address and a name, followed by an email with
instructions on how to connect to the meeting . Your email address will not be disclosed to
the public. If you wish to make an oral public comment but do not wish to provide your
name, you may enter “Cupertino Resident” or similar designation.
3. When the Chair calls for the item on which you wish to speak, click on “raise hand.”
Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak.
4. When called, please limit your remarks to the time allotted and the specific agenda topic .
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to
attend this teleconference meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability
that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 6
hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request, in
advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the
meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative
format.
NOTICE AND CALL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of the Audit Committee is hereby
called for Monday, December 13, 2021, commencing at 4:00 p.m. In accordance with
Page 2
2
Audit Committee Agenda December 13, 2021
Government Code 54953(e), this will be a teleconference meeting without a physical
location to help stop the spread of COVID-19. Said special meeting shall be for the purpose
of conducting business on the subject matters listed below under the heading, “Special
Meeting."
SPECIAL MEETING
ORDERS OF THE DAY
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.Subject: Approve Minutes of Regular Meeting on November 15, 2021
Recommended Action: Approve Minutes of Regular Meeting on November 15, 2021
A - Minutes 11.15.21
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Committee on any matter
within the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3)
minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect
to a matter not on the agenda.
NEW BUSINESS
2.Subject: Embezzlement Update
Recommended Action: Receive Embezzlement Update
3.Subject: Proposed Audit Committee 2022 Schedule and Work Plan
Recommended Action: Approve Proposed Audit Committee 2022 Schedule and Work
Plan
Proposed Audit Committee 2022 Schedule and Work Plan
4.Subject: Receive Budget Format Review and Opengov Study Session
Recommended Action: Receive Budget Format Review and Opengov Study Session
A - Budget Format Review Update
B - Sub-Committee Initial Comments on Budget Format Review
C - Sub-Committee Formal Memorandum on Budget Format Review
D - Budget Format Review Update PPT
E - Questions Regarding the Current Budget Report
F - OpenGov Training
5.Subject: OPEB and Pension Section 115 Trust Discount Rate Sensitivity Analysis
Recommended Action: Receive OPEB and Pension Section 115 Trust Discount Rate
Sensitivity Analysis
A - Staff Report
Page 3
3
Audit Committee Agenda December 13, 2021
OLD BUSINESS
STAFF AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
FUTURE AGENDA SETTING
ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this
teleconference meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special
assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the
meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability,
meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available
in the appropriate alternative format.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the members after publication of the agenda will
be made available for public inspection. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office in City Hall located at
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section
2.08.100 written communications sent to the Cupertino City Council, Commissioners or City staff
concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These
written communications are accessible to the public through the City’s website and kept in packet
archives. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City
that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will
be made publicly available on the City website.
Members of the public are entitled to address the members concerning any item that is described in the
notice or agenda for this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the
members on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so during the public comment .
Page 4
4
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
21-10211 Agenda Date:
12/13/2021 Agenda #: 1.
Subject: Approve Minutes of Regular Meeting on November 15, 2021
Approve Minutes of Regular Meeting on November 15, 2021
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 12/9/2021Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™5
Page 1
City of Cupertino
Audit Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes
November 15, 2021
CALL TO ORDER
At 4:00 p.m., Chair Liang called the special meeting to order. This was a teleconference meeting
with no physical location.
ROLL CALL
Committee Members Present: Chair Daisy Liang, Vice Chair Chen, Committee Member Song
(arrived late), Vice Mayor Chao, Councilmember Moore
City Staff Present: Greg Larson, Kristina Alfaro, Zach Korach, Thomas Leung
Absent: None.
Guests: Rick Rosenthal, Mark Steranka (Moss Adams)
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Vice Mayor Chao moved to approve the regular meeting minutes of October 25, 2021. Chair
Liang seconded and the motion carried unanimously with Vice Chair Chen abstaining
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
2. Review and Consider Accepting OPEB and Pension Investment Trust Policies – 45 minutes
Korach provided a brief presentation on the OPEB and Pension Investment Trusts, including
their purpose, roles and responsibilities, and recommended revisions to the draft policies.
Councilmember Moore inquired about the December 7th approval date as well as the
benchmark target that were established. Rick Rosenthal explained the benchmarks and the
broadest measures used. Councilmember Moore expressed concern about commodity
benchmarks existing despite no commodities included in the portfolio. Rosenthal explained the
methodology of commodities within US Bank and that the range is from 0-2%. Vice Mayor
Chao asked if the Committee reviews the policy every year. Vice Mayor Chao discussed the
return performance of the trusts compared to the target rate of return and the strong
performance by US Bank. Vice Mayor Chao asked how points within a range are determined
and which asset class has seen the strongest return over the previous year. Rosenthal explained
how equities have been the strongest class and how US Bank operates tactically through market
conditions and how it affects the ranges. Chair Liang asked how quickly US Bank responds to
market conditions. Rosenthal noted that it’s constantly being evaluated, but significant changes
do not occur regularly. Councilmember Moore inquired about the discount rate or target rate of
return and how the Committee can recommend to Council without having discussion. Korach
noted that the discount rate or target rate of return is determined by Audit Committee and
6
Page 2
recommended to City Council and that the discount rate and sensitivity analysis was presented
during the September special meeting. Councilmember Moore referenced a staff report from
2019 that offered additional information. Korach discussed the history of the discount
rate/target rate of return reductions and the recommendation to maintain the current rates for
the next year. Councilmember Moore requested the updated analysis. City Manager Larson
inquired about CalPERS media attention and where the City thinks they might go in terms of
discount rate reductions. Thomas Leung noted that CalPERS would be making a final
determination between 6.5%-7% during their November board meeting. Councilmember Moore
moved to accept the policies as stated with an updated discount rate and sensitivity analysis
brought to the Committee at a future meeting. Vice Mayor Chao seconded and the motion
carried unanimously.
3. HdL Contract and Candidate Refund Error – 35 minutes
City Manager Larson highlighted the HdL contract challenges as discussed in the staff report.
Larson discussed aspects of budget and purchasing authority. Committee Member Song asked
about Moss Adams audit and the ethics, transparency, and segregation of duties. Larson
discussed the various internal controls and cost benefit considerations. Vice Mayor Chao noted
that the contract issue still should have been prevented/detected and wondered what can be
done in the future. Larson noted that bringing the function in-house would assist with the
oversight as well as the cost. Vice Chair Chen asked about a potential purchasing manager –
Larson suggested waiting for the internal audit report to receive recommendations from Moss
Adams. Vice Chair Chen also asked about the use of work orders. Larson agreed that the use of
work orders could be beneficial. Vice Chair Chen asked about the City Manager’s budget
authority. Larson noted that purchasing authority was $175,000. Councilmember Moore
discussed the history of the contract amendments and noted that the first contract was exceeded
as well. Councilmember Moore expressed interest in ensuring the contract service and other
budget account line item amounts provide more control. Councilmember Moore noted that the
delivering of masks should have been covered under the CARES Act. Peggy Griffin thanked the
Committee and staff for looking into the matter and requested that Larson’s presentation be
attached to the agenda materials. Korach provided an update on the refund error and noted that
this is an opportunity for improvement and the City is eager to receive Moss Adams’
recommendations for implementation considerations. Vice Mayor Chao agreed and requested a
final resolution/response to these matters come back to the Committee. Vice Chair Chen
expressed interest in seeing the final resolution as decided by City Council.
Vice Chair Chen motioned to move items 4, 5, 6 to a future meeting. Councilmember Moore
seconded and the motion carried unanimously by all members present.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
STAFF AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
None.
7
Page 3
FUTURE AGENDA SETTING
A special meeting on December 13, 2021 will be scheduled to discuss items 4, 5, and 6 as well as
the discount rate sensitivity analysis.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
Recording Secretary:
Zach Korach, Finance Manager
8
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
21-10208 Agenda Date:
12/13/2021 Agenda #: 2.
Subject: Embezzlement Update
Receive Embezzlement Update
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 12/9/2021Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™9
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
21-10209 Agenda Date:
12/13/2021 Agenda #: 3.
Subject: Proposed Audit Committee 2022 Schedule and Work Plan
Approve Proposed Audit Committee 2022 Schedule and Work Plan
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 12/9/2021Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™10
January 24, 2022 February 24, 2022 April 25, 2022 May 23, 2022 July 25, 2022 August 22, 2022 October 24, 2022 November 28, 2022
Approve Prior
Meeting Minutes
Approve Prior
Meeting Minutes
Approve Prior
Meeting Minutes
Approve Prior
Meeting Minutes
Approve Prior
Meeting Minutes
Approve Prior
Meeting Minutes
Approve Prior
Meeting Minutes
Approve Prior
Meeting Minutes
Treasurerʹs Report
for Quarter Ending
December 31, 2021
Internal Audit
Update
Treasurerʹs Report
for Quarter Ending
March 31, 2022
Internal Audit
Update
Treasurerʹs Report
for Quarter Ending
June 30, 2022
Internal Audit
Update
Treasurerʹs Report
for Quarter Ending
September 30, 2022
Internal Audit
Update
OPEB & Pension
Section 115 Trust
Performance Report
for Quarter Ending
December 31, 2021
Budget Format
Review
OPEB & Pension
Section 115 Trust
Performance Report
for Quarter Ending
March 31, 2022
Budget Format
Review
OPEB & Pension
Section 115 Trust
Performance Report
for Quarter Ending
June 30, 2022
External Audit
Subcommittee and
RFP Kickoff
OPEB & Pension
Section 115 Trust
Performance Report
for Quarter Ending
September 30, 2022
ACFR and AUP
Draft
Review/Update
Review of FY 2020‐
21 ACFR and
Supplemental
Reports
Annual Review of
City Investment
Policy
Annual Review of
Pension and OPEB
Trust Investment
Policy
Committee Input to
Independent
Auditor on Interim
Audit and AUP
Engagements
Follow‐up on
Previous Fiscal Year
Management Letter
Items and
Management
Responses
Source: Cupertino, CA Municipal Code, Chapter 2.88.100: Audit Committee
The powers and functions of the Audit Committee shall be as follows:
A: To review the annual audit report and management letter;
B: To recommend appointment of auditors;
C. To review the monthly Treasurer’s report;
D. To recommend a budget format;
E. To review City investment policies and internal controls of such policies.
F. To recommend appointment of internal auditors;
G. To review internal audit reports. (Ord. 20-2208, § 1, 2020; Ord. 1679, § 1 (part), 1995
CITY OF CUPERTINO ‐ AUDIT COMMITTEE 2022 SCHEDULE AND WORK PLAN
Summary of Duties – Powers – Responsibilities of
Cupertino Audit Committee
11
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
21-10210 Agenda Date:
12/13/2021 Agenda #: 4.
Subject: Receive Budget Format Review and Opengov Study Session
Receive Budget Format Review and Opengov Study Session
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 12/9/2021Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™12
AUDIT COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
Meeting: October 27, 2020
Subject
Budget Format Review Update.
Recommended Action
Accept staff report.
Discussion
In FY 2019-20, Audit Committee Chair Eno Schmidt and Vice Mayor Paul established a
sub-committee to review the City’s budget format. Initial observations, suggestions, and
questions were submitted to and responded by City staff (see attachment F2). On
November 12, 2019, the sub-committee issued a formal memo (see attachment F3) to
City staff discussing the conclusions and recommendations from the review process.
City staff’s responses to the November 12, 2019 memo are attached (see attachment F4).
City staff’s updates on budget format are provided below:
Adopted Budget
While the sub-committee concluded that the City’s budget document meets or exceeds
its peers in a variety of categories, the City continues to improve the budget document
each year to make the budget easier to understand for residents. For FY 2020-21, the City
has added the following sections to the budget document:
Capital Improvement Program (Page 42)
o Discussion of Capital Improvement Program funding and financial
impacts
Revenue Comparisons (Page 118)
o Per Capita comparisons of total revenues, property tax, sales tax,
transient occupancy tax, franchise fees, and building permits with
neighboring jurisdictions
Pension (Page 153)
o Explanation of CalPERS pension plan, discount rate, and investment
returns
o Discussion on the impact of CalPERS discount rate and investment
returns
13
o Discussion of the City’s strategies to reduce pension cost volatility,
including the Section 115 Trust
Budget at a Glance
The City received feedback from the sub-committee to reference the Transparency Portal
in the Budget at a Glance. The City is working on its first interactive Budget at a Glance,
which will bridge the gap between the traditional Budget at a Glance and the
Transparency Portal.
OpenGov Transparency Portal
The sub-committee recommended that the City enhance the Transparency Portal by:
Providing more context to major amount and changes and
Interconnecting key communication elements on the budget to the Transparency
Portal.
Based on the sub-committee’s feedback, the City is currently working to provide more
context to financial data in the Transparency Portal through the following initiatives:
Interactive Budget at a Glance
o Present the budget in a simple, visual, and interactive format
o Provide more context to financial reports in the Transparency Portal
Interactive Capital Improvement Program Budget
o Illustrate progress of capital projects from a financial standpoint
o Connect project narratives to interactive maps and financial reports
Stories for important initiatives (e.g. CARES Act)
o Provide updates on important initiatives
o Connect initiatives to financial reports in the Transparency Portal
o Gather feedback from the community
Budget Story
o Explain important financial concepts including revenues, expenses,
departments, and funds
o Provide answers to frequently asked questions about the budget
o Serve as a starting point to users unfamiliar with government finance or
the Transparency Portal
These initiatives will help the City improve its financial transparency and community
engagement. In addition, the City will continue working to incorporate feedback from
the sub-committee, City Council, and residents, into the format of its budget documents
and reports.
Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.
14
Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impact.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Thomas Leung, Senior Management Analyst
Reviewed by: Kristina Alfaro, Director of Administrative Services
Approved for Submission by: Deborah Feng, City Manager
Attachments:
F2 – Sub-Committee’s Initial Comments on Budget Format Review
F3 – Sub-Committee’s Formal Memorandum on Budget Format Review
F4 – City staff’s responses to the November 12, 2019 Memo
15
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE ANNUAL BUDGET REPORT
Questions Regarding the Current Budget Report (Please provide written responses
within two weeks):
1. Three Budget Reviewers for the GFOA Award evaluation had suggestions for
improvement. Please describe how, if at all, each of the suggestions for
improvement were addressed in the budget for the fiscal year beginning July
2019. Please provide evaluation at least on the below-listed two items.
Responses with respect to all of the suggestions by the GFOA Budget Reviewers
would be appreciated.
a. Reviewer ID S411 suggests under “Document -Wide Criteria” that the City
“Try to reduce the document size to around 400 pages.”
RESPONSE: The Budget Team continues to take this comment into consideration each
year; however, it is a challenge to identify which specific sections can afford to be
reduced by 100+ pages. This comment is not marked with an asterisk (*) and as a result,
does not require implementation to ensure the budget award is received in subsequent
years. If the Sub-Committee has specific recommendations as to which sections they
would like to see reduced, and so long as all of the GFOA and CSMFO award criteria
are not compromised, the Budget Team will be glad to accommodate.
16
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
2
b. All three reviewers rated the presentation for category F9 “Impact of
capital investments on operating budget” as being “Information Not
Present” or “Does Not Satisfy”.
RESPONSE: Typically, operating, or General Fund, impacts are quantified via
operating transfers; however, there were no budgeted operating transfers in FY 18 -19 or
FY 19-20 for Capital Improvement Program projects. The City’s General Fund will
transfer excess fund balance at fiscal year-end (FYE) to the Capital Reserve (Fund 429)
in accordance with its Use of One Time Funds Policy (page 85). FY 2019-20 was the first
year the City’s budget document included a Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
project summary (page 493). The Fund Balance Report (page 96) discusses the impact of
revenues and expenditures/expenses on each particular fund’s fund balance, including
the capital projects from the CIP budget. The Budget Team agrees that a more
expansive narrative/discussion may be beneficial; perhaps in the forecast section near
the end of the Financial Policies and Schedules section.
c. How were the other suggestions for improvement by GFOA Budget
Reviewers were addressed.
RESPONSE:
17
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
3
- Financial Structure, Policy and Process: Department org charts have experienced
changes in recent years. Enhancing the aesthetics and understandability will be
an area to address in FY 2020-21.
- Financial Summaries: Categorized and forecasted summaries for all of the City’s
funds were included beginning on page 146. Additional information and charts
can be included (similar to the General Fund); however, and as mentioned above,
the Budget Team does keep the document’s length in mind when determining
what and what not to include.
- Capital and Debt: See response to 1.b. above
- Departmental Information: Total FTEs are included in each of the Department
Budgets. This is also reiterated/duplicated/summarized on page 491 and
presented historically as well. Performance measures are included as well as
workload indicators (FY 2019-20 was the first year for presenting workload
indicators)
- Document-Wide Criteria: The Budget Team will add the state to the cover so
long as it complies with branding requirements as established by the
Communications Office.
- Other Comments/Suggestions: No specific comments or suggestions noted for
implementation.
2. With respect to the Transparency Portal and the use by Cupertino of OpenGov:
18
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
4
a. What are the goals of having the Transparency Portal?
RESPONSE:
- The Transparency Portal provides an accessible platform so that members of the
public have access to the City’s financial data in real time.
- This tool fosters communication and trust not only with the public, but amongst
City staff.
- OpenGov’s Budget Builder provides an effective tool for departments to compile,
submit, review, and approve budget requests. It also serves as an important
archive for the thousands of communications that occur during the budget
process from one year to the next.
b. What key performance indicators (KPIs) for the Transparency Portal have
been established by the City?
RESPONSE: The City does not have KPIs for the Transparency Portal. The Budget
Team is open to establishing KPIs; however, success is measured by volume of external
use
c. How has the City been doing relative to these KPIs?
RESPONSE: See response 2.b. above.
19
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
5
3. With regard to the City’s link provided to OpenGov as to the Transparency
Portal, in examining on non-departmental expenditures for the budget in 2019-
2020, why is the actual for 2019-2020 equal to the budget for 2019-2020 (as of Sep
28, 2019)? See screenshot taken from this link:
https://cupertino.opengov.com/transparency#/28185/accountType=expenses&em
bed=n&breakdown=28459e6a-563e-4695-97d4-
8a0d97d881e1¤tYearAmount=cumulative¤tYearPeriod=years&gra
ph=bar&legendSort=desc&proration=true&saved_view=83847&selection=081626
7C08601EE8C423B11CADCC4989&projections=null&projectionType=null&highli
ghting=null&highlightingVariance=null&year=NaN&selectedDataSetIndex=null
&fiscal_start=earliest&fiscal_end=latest
RESPONSE: The City implemented a change in methodology for recording its
operating transfers (non-departmental expenditures). Rather than
recording/recognizing them on a quarterly/monthly basis, the City records/recognizes
them all at once as soon as the budget is adopted by Council. Purpose: increased
efficiency determining the amount and reason for each interfund transfer when
preparing the Interfund Transfers footnote in the Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report (CAFR) at year-end. In other words, rather than having hundreds of
transactions/line items to tie to and from each of the funds, the gross transfer amounts
can more easily be tied to the adopted budget, Council resolutions, etc.
20
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
6
a. This raises the question, separate from the format of the data presented,
how, if at all, is the data presented to the public on OpenGov reviewed for
accuracy and completeness?
RESPONSE: The information presented in OpenGov is imported straight from the
City’s enterprise resource planning (ERP) system, New World System (NWS). All of
the financial data is reviewed and reconciled on a weekly and monthly basis to ensure
accuracy, completeness, cutoff, and existence.
b. What process is followed? If there is a process, is the process
memorialized in a written medium?
RESPONSE: Other than what has been discussed in the previous response, there is no
formal process memorialized in a written medium. The Budget Team is open to
recommendations and suggestions.
c. What documentation is reviewed in the process of evaluating OpenGov
information, and what management approvals are required prior to
publication of the information?
RESPONSE: The information that is imported into OpenGov from NWS is subject to
numerous controls and reviews, namely within the payroll, accounts payable, and
21
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
7
revenue collection process. These are processed and reviewed by multiple employees,
signed off and authorized by management, on a weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly basis.
4. For Budget versus Actual in the OpenGov transparency portal (see above link in
question 2), Non-departmental drops from 2018-19 Actual of $19,376,088 to 2019-
20 (Amended Budget) and Actual of $10,539,557?
RESPONSE: Non-departmental revenues and expenditures/expenses include the City’s
operating transfers from one fund to the other. Prior year actuals are typically higher
than subsequent year budget amounts for the following reason; the Adopted Budget
does not include excess General Fund fund balance that is transferred to the Capital
Reserve in accordance with the City’s Use of One Time Funds Policy (page 85)
a. Can we link to the “Department Operating Budgets” then to the Non-
departmental section to help explain?
RESPONSE: That is certainly an option. We can also have a more expansive
explanation in the non-department section to explain the purpose of each of the
transfers.
22
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
8
b. An explanation in the Budget message document for this particular
question does not seem to be present. If it is, please indicate the location.
If such an explanation is not present, please suggest a location for it.
RESPONSE: Correct, other than including the non-departmental amounts within the
fund’s total budgeted amounts (page 31 for example), there is no expanded discussion
on the transfers in the Budget Message section.
5. Can the subcommittee see the questions submitted by the public to the City
related to the Transparency Portal/budget for the past year?
RESPONSE: The City has been frequently asked how much has been spent on the
Regnart Creek Trail project. To the Budget Team’s knowledge, no addit ional questions
have been raised.
6. Since Opengov is being used as Cupertino’s Transparency Portal, see these
selected comments at the Opengov link:
a. “Build Trust Through Effective Communication – Engaging with
constituents and stakeholders is critical to every public agency’s success.
With OpenGov, leaders can analyze and communicate complex topics and
decisions in a simple manner anyone can understand. Agencies are able to
build trust with colleagues and residents by gathering input on key
23
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
9
initiatives and aligning budget and the strategic plan to both performance
objectives and public expectations.”
i. Question: What are the key complex topics and decisions made in
Cupertino that (the City’s leaders) through OpenGov are
communicating?
RESPONSE: The Budget Team has primarily utilized OpenGov’s Transparency Portal
and Budget Builder software. We’ve also used this platform to present budget and
prior year actual data at City Council Meetings. Additionally, we’ve used this tool to
provide information to City Council on various subject like Capital Projects, salary and
benefit costs. Moving forward, the Budget Team is excited to further complement the
budget tools with the use of stories, an interactive platform to present and inform
audiences on specific projects and initiatives.
ii. How is the City using OpenGov (the transparency portal) by
“aligning budget and the strategic plan to both performance
objectives and public expectations”?
RESPONSE: The budget process establishes a public expectation and the Transparency
Portal allows the public to view, in real-time, the City’s financial data.
24
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
10
b. One possible idea is to (cross)link the “context” in the Budget message (for
example the June 2019 Budget message) and other “context” in the
Department Operating Budgets to some of the OpenGov Transparency
portal modules, for major line items or major changes from previous
years. The OpenGov transparency portal currently is filled with data and
ability to compare but could benefit from adding convenient context. Is
this something that Staff could do?
RESPONSE: Adding “notes” is definitely one way to increase context. The use of
“stories” is also another tool available to the City that can obviously tell a story about a
project, initiative, etc. Based on requests from Council, Commissions, Committees, the
public, management, etc., staff can create and publish stories as necessary.
i. Could Staff then introduce some of the OpenGov communication
elements (see above questions and Opengov website for more)?
RESPONSE: Open Town Hall is a survey tool the City is looking into utilizing more
consistently and frequently.
ii. Palo Alto is using the “note” function (although only one posted) of
the OpenGov. What does Staff think about using this functionality
as a starting point for communications? See link here to Palo Alto:
25
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
11
https://paloalto.opengov.com/transparency#/18215/accountType=re
venues&embed=n&breakdown=types¤tYearAmount=cumul
ative¤tYearPeriod=years&graph=bar&legendSort=coa&pror
ation=true&saved_view=51273&selection=E7F4AA9C788A9B9A3D
41A6865E3D305B&projections=null&projectionType=null&highligh
ting=null&highlightingVariance=null&year=NaN&selectedDataSetI
ndex=null&fiscal_start=2013&fiscal_end=latest
RESPONSE: Yes, we can add these notes to various saved “views” to provide context
to the reader/audience.
7. The order in which one accesses the below Budget documents a. – e., can result in
an entirely different set of questions. What is the intended order that key Budget
documents should be examined by the public?:
a. Budget (500+ pages)
b. OpenGov (transparency portal)
c. Budget at a Glance
d. Budget message
e. Department Operating Budgets
RESPONSE: While the Budget Team’s preference would be the Adopted Budget (which
contains the Budget Message and Department Operating Budgets), followed by the
26
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
12
Budget at a Glance, and then finally OpenGov, one of the advantages to having these
multiple tools is that the order of preference can be determined by any reader/audience
depending on their needs, interests, and desires. For example, a reader that isn’t
interested in getting lost in 500+ pages of details might prefer to a high level glad at the
Budget at a Glance – and vice a versa. The moment a budget becomes adopted and
printed, it’s already outdated. That is what is great about OpenGov; it is a living
constantly updating platform that addresses the common question, “I know how much
was budgeted…how much have we spent?”
8. Following-up on Question 7., above, there are also Financial Policies and
Schedules. Assuming that the above-listed Budget documents of 7.a. – 7.e. are
not envisioned as being examined in any particular order (and if they are, we
should make that clear to the public), please consider using items 7.d. and 7.e. as
a contextual “bridge” between the Budget at a Glance and the Budget? Or
perhaps there should be another intermediate step to the Transparency Portal
which provides both context/bridge and the data? Should all of the above-
mentioned budget items (7.a. – 7.e. and the Financial Policies and Schedules) be
linked together in some way in the Transparency Portal?
RESPONSE: Agreed. Each of the tools discussed have pros and cons and
readers/audiences may not be aware of them (e.g., one is detailed, one is high-level, one
27
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
13
is current, etc.). One of the ways we’ve tried to tackle this challenge is through events
such as Budget & Bites and through social media engagement. The Budget Team is
open to recommendations and idea to building this contextual “bridge.”
9. In Financial Policies and Schedules:
a. On p75 (p9 of 94 PDF) of the Fiscal Policies – Revenue Policies, the final
policy listed states “Ensure that Enterprise activities remain self-
supporting in the long-term.” How does the City analyze compliance with
this policy? Please provide examples?
RESPONSE: Governmental Accounting Standards Board and various interpretations of
the standards do not appear to have a specific threshold for how “self-supporting” is
defined. For example, there is not an exact threshold of 50% which would qualify a
fund or activity to be reported as an enterprise fund. Compliance is continually
monitored based on historical and/or current subsidized (General Fund assistance)
activities.
b. On p92 (p26 of 94 PDF), the Audit Committee is neither listed nor has a
budgeted expenditure allocated. Can this be corrected? If so, please
describe the process for including the Audit Committee here.
28
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
14
RESPONSE: We will ensure the Audit Committee and related staff time is added in the
FY 2020-21 Proposed and Adopted Budget.
10. Is there anywhere within the Budget documents where a member of the public
can easily determine how much of Cupertino’s annual budget is spent on
compensation, benefits, and pension obligations for the City’s employees? If not,
please provide in table format, broken down by departments, the number of
FTEs, and the absolute amounts spent on each department for compensation,
benefits, and pension obligations. Please include City Council compensation.
RESPONSE: The resolution on page 12 provides a financial overview by fund showing
the City-wide account classification amounts (employee compensation and employee
benefits are included). Page 40 and 41 of the Budget Message discuss the ongoing
challenges of retirement benefits. Page 111 discussed the General Fund expenditures,
specifically the majority of the City’s employee compensation and employee benefits.
The pages to follow within the All Fund Summary beginning on page 117, show the
employee compensation and employee benefits totals aggregated at the fund-type level.
29
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUDIT COMMITTEE – SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS
15
The second (2nd) page of each of the Department budget sections shows a total FTE
allocation. Shortly thereafter and near the front of each of the Department budgets, a
total revenues and expenditures by account classification is reported. For example,
Council and Commissions’ Department budget on page 165 reports the total employee
compensation and employee benefits totals for the year. Lastly, there is a saved view in
the transparency portal titled “Employee Compensation and Benefits” that breaks out
by department salary and benefits costs by department.
30
1
AUDIT COMMITTEE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE ANNUAL BUDGET REPORT
November 12, 2019
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Awards from respected Associations for Budget Presentation highlight and support the outstanding
work being accomplished by the City Staff of Cupertino in the budget process:
a. Distinguished Budget Presentation Award by Government Finance Officers Association; and
b. Excellence Award for Fiscal Year Operating Budget by California Society of Municipal Finance
Officers.
2. Comparison of budget documents from other cities as presented in September 25, 2019 Staff Report to
the Budget Book Subcommittee of the Audit Committee, shows the City of Cupertino meeting or
exceeding its peers in a variety of budget presentation categories. Use of the Transparency Portal and
communication of Budget At a Glance are clearly within the peer leadership.
3. In the spirit of continuous improvement and building on the strong budget formats already in-place in
Cupertino, here are some areas the Subcommittee recommends further investigation and possible
adjustment be considered by focus on possible enhancements to the
a. Budget At a Glance
i. Adding modules such as the Ten-Year Staffing and Population Growth chart to highlight
and explain significant changes or elements of the current budget; and
ii. Reference Transparency portal of OpenGov for supplemental key elements.
b. Transparency portal of OpenGov
i. Provide more context to major amounts and changes from year to year or budget to
actual by
1. Linking to the context already available in other budget documents or
2. Creating new content if needed and posting.
ii. Interconnect or make more obvious some of the key communication elements on the
budget already underway in Cupertino and as listed by OpenGov as one of the
transparency portal’s strengths. For example, OpenGov on its website states “Build
Trust Through Effective Communication. Engaging with constituents and stakeholders is
critical to every public agency’s success. With OpenGov, leaders can analyze and
communicate complex topics and decisions in a simple manner anyone can understand.
Agencies are able to build trust with colleagues and residents by gathering input on key
initiatives and aligning budget and the strategic plan to both performance objectives and
public expectations.”
1. Link into OpenGov those initiatives already underway; and
2. Explore other ways to implement and demonstrate through the portal.
PLEASE SEE SEPARATE SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO CITY STAFF WITH
RESPONSES FROM STAFF
In particular the following City Staff responses warrant additional consideration and action based on
responses provided: Questions 1b, 1c, 2b, 4a, 6ai, 6b, 6bii, 8, 9b and 10.
31
2
Additionally, the response by City staff to Question 9a which asked about the current stated
policy of “Ensure that Enterprise activities remain self-supporting in the long-term” seems to us to
indicate as a minimum the word “Ensure” might be replaced with “Monitor” or even better a policy
defining “self-supporting in the long-term” be adopted so that the City indeed could ensure that said
policy is being implemented.
Respectively submitted
Budget Subcommittee of Cupertino Audit Committee
Councilman Darcy Paul
Cupertino Audit Committee Chair Eno Schmidt
32
Audit Committee Regular Meeting
October 27, 2020
Budget Format Review Update
33
1.Adopted Budget
2.Recommendations
3.Solutions
4.Next Steps
Topics
34
•Added CIP Financial Impacts Discussion
•Added Revenue Comparisons
•Expanded Pension Discussion
Adopted Budget
35
Transparency Portal
Historical Data
Budget
Budget vs. Actuals
Budget Documents
Adopted Budget
Budget at a Glance
Recommendations: Bridging the Gap
36
How We Bridge the Gap
Transparency
Portal
OpenGov
Stories
Open Town
Hall
37
The Goal
Transparency Engagement
Education
38
Interactive Budget at a Glance
39
Resident Tax Contribution Calculator
40
Interactive CIP Budget
41
Important Initiatives
42
Budget Landing Page
43
Timeline
Interactive Budget at a
Glance
Resident Tax Contribution
Calculator
Interactive CIP Budget
Important Initiatives
Budget Landing Page
44
•Budget Format Review Subcommittee
Next Steps
45
Questions?
Thank you!
46
Questions Regarding the Current Budget Report
Audit Committee Chair Daisy Liang
1. Page 35 and 55 of the FY 21-22 Proposed Budget: Please add the Adopted Budget
amounts for anywhere the FY18 and FY19 actuals are presented. This will allow a reader
to understand where the actuals ended in respect to the amounts budgeted.
RESPONSE: The format of showing two years of actuals, prior year adopted, and current year adopted
follows the criteria set forth by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). Additionally,
changing the size of the charts would result in the charts being significantly reduced in size and could
make is less legible. As an alternative, staff could issue a separate appendix showing the prior year
budget and actuals at the detailed account line item level and post on the City’s website.
2. Page 42: The Non-Personnel Assumptions section discussed one-time special projects.
Can we add links throughout the document for repeated information? Can we add onetime
special projects as a saved “view” in OpenGov to allow the public to easily access
the information?
RESPONSE: We can add a reference on page 42 to note that special projects are further detailed in the
respective department narrative sections. Each page of the budget document has a link back to the Table of
Contents. From there, a user can easily move to any section of the document they desire.
3. Page 81: The Basis of Budgeting section discusses the budget being split into nine
departments. Can the document include a pie chart to show the departments
percentages?
RESPONSE: General Fund expenditures by department is presented on page 36 of the Proposed Budget.
4. Page 93: What is the formula to calculate the $19,000,000 for Economic Uncertainty
reserve?
RESPONSE: The formula is noted on page 93 of the Proposed Budget document: “represents two months
of General Fund (GF) expenditures excluding transfers out plus a two year drop in total general fund
revenue of 13% or approximately 1.5 months, excluding the use of reserves.” This can be estimated by
using the “Financial Overview by Fund” chart on page 103.
47
In recent years, unassigned fund balance in General Fund has maintained high levels. That, coupled with
the establishment of the Section 115 Trust (pension), City staff have not recommended increases to the
Economic Uncertainty Reserve. In the event of economic uncertainty, further recommendations would be
brought before City Council (e.g., increasing the Economic Uncertainty Reserve, utilizing the Pension
Section 115 Trust, budget reductions, etc.).
5. Page 138: Can General Fund fund balance be added to the 20-Year General Fund
Financial Forecast chart?
RESPONSE: Page 138 shows the revenues and expenditures and difference between the bars and the line
represent changes in fund balance; these are emphasized on page 139. We could add a sentence nothing
the beginning unassigned and total fund balance to provide additional context. That said, the General
Fund fund balance forecast is discussed in detail beginning on page 155. Although having all of this
information on one page would be ideal, it simply is not feasible. The forecast section is presented in a
format consistent with the rest of the document and follows the flow/format of an income statement
(revenue expenditures fund balance).
6. Page 148: What is “salary savings” as presented in the Five-year General Fund
Expenditures Forecast chart?
RESPONSE: Salary savings is a common line item in budgets, particularly in forecast models. The City
budgets for 100% of the authorized employee head count; however, throughout the year, savings is
realized through turnover and attrition. This amount represents the anticipated savings from vacant
positions and attrition throughout the fiscal year (cost of approximately 5 full-time employees).
7. Page 541: Where are the capital projects for FY 21-22 as well as any previously funded
projects that have yet to be completed?
RESONSE: The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) was not included in the Proposed Budget. It was
first introduced to City Council at a study session on May 4, 2021, subsequent to the publishing of the
Proposed Budget on May 1, 2021. The Final Adopted Budget will incorporate all financial information
pertaining to CIP. Additionally, Public Works and the CIP team will be issuing a separate CIP Budget
document as well.
Total GF Expenditures 88,138,778$
(less transfers out)(11,251,984)$
Subtotal 76,886,794$
Expenditures (2 months)12,814,466$
Revenues (1.5 months)9,372,611$
Hypothetical Reserve Amount in FY 21-22 22,187,077$
Actual Reserve Amount in FY 21-22 19,000,000$
Difference (3,187,077)$
48
Councilmember Moore
May 18, 2021
Format:
1. While Contingencies may not be an appropriate format issue to discuss, I think it should
be removed and the reserve in the General Fund be appropriated as needed. The item has
not been transparent from its inception in 2013 and looks like a slush fund with the
largest share in the City Manager’s budget. The Staff Report to City Council in June of
2013 neglected to mention that a new contingency amount of $427k was even being
appropriated and now the current format for the Budget shows $3,773 for contingencies
for the City Manager on p. 221, yet on p. 245 of the current Proposed Budget, there is
$593,250 appropriated in contingencies. Additionally, the City Manager is given
authority to approve their spending on p. 244. This practice, and the whole contingency
category, in my opinion, needs to end.
RESPONSE: City Council directed staff to reduce the City Manager Discretionary Fund to $75,000 (a
reduction of $518,250) at the June 4, 2021 study session. City Council ultimately adopted the FY 21-22
Budget with a City Manager Discretionary Fund budget amount of $75,000.
2. I do prefer the staffing tables used by Campbell and Sunnyvale for clarity.
RESPONSE: Noted. It will be challenging to incorporate similar staffing tables throughout each of the
respective Program narratives. However, staff can create an appendix report for all positions and present
by Department and Program.
3. I prefer the more detailed accounting which the City did in 2013 and other cities continue
to do, referred to as the Account Level Summary.
RESPONSE: Noted. It will significantly increase the length of the document to show the account level
detail throughout the document, but as an alternative, staff can create an appendix report for all budget
and actuals at the account level detail.
4. I would like the previous comments from the last Budget Format Review Subcommittee
(attached) added along with my comments and Daisy’s for next week’s City Council
Budget Agenda item.
RESPONSE: Noted.
49
Content:
Proposed Budget is pretty easy to read and follow. Movement of money between funds along
with department divisions and tasks moving between departments makes following the
changes to department costs difficult to capture. Because some funding increased a great deal
in 2020, it
would help to have a comparison back to 2019 in some instances (City Manager Contingency,
for example, Proposed Budget p. 245)
1. Community outreach improvements to get input regarding the Proposed Budget goals and
process.
a. Proposed Budget mentions input from the Audit and Fiscal Strategic Plan
Committees, however neither has reviewed the Proposed Budget for input. Should
these committees receive the Proposed Budget prior to coming to City Council in
the future or is this process order better? The Fiscal Strategic Plan Committee is
not codified and has no codified duty to review the Proposed Budget.
RESPONSE: The Audit Committee is tasked with reviewing the Budget Format and the Fiscal Strategic
Plan has historically reviewed the City’s financial forecast, which is an important component to the City’s
budget document. While input on the actual budget document is only received from the Community via
public meetings, the City’s budget team holds annual community engagement budget workshops and
includes interactive budget reports throughout the year via OpenGov.
2. The organizational charts need to reflect the Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC)
a. Add date of organizational chart
b. Update the online chart
c. Update CMC to reflect current organizational structure (e.g. add I.T. Department)
d. This should probably not be a work plan item, but an ongoing process of CMC
cleanup
RESPONSE: The organizational charts in the budget document are correct. They will need to be updated
online and in the CMC. The date of the organization chart in the budget corresponds to the budget
document itself; thus the organization chart corresponds to FY 21-22.
3. CMC mentions a potential Public Safety Department should Police and Fire be
administered by the City. The City contracts out both. How is the Fire Department paid
for?
RESPONSE: Santa Clara County Fire is funded via property taxes. Property tax revenues are
generated from the 1% tax on property values. Of that 1%, the City receives 7% and Santa Clara
County Fire receives 15%, with the majority of the 1% going to school districts.
50
4. City Manager discretionary spending was $743 for 2020 yet the 2022 Proposed Budget is
$593,250. Additionally, the Program Overview states that the contingency budget for the
City Manager requires the City Manager approval (Proposed Budget p. 244). I would
recommend this amount be removed and a policy for oversight be put in place. The City
Manager’s overall budget has increased from $786,535 in 2019 (expenditures plus
contingencies) to $2,115,071 proposed for 2022. How is this increase accounted for?
Review the City of Cupertino Purchasing Policy (2013) Code Sec. 3.22 and 3.23.
RESPONSE: The City Manager Contingency program was established to meet citywide
unexpected expenses that may occur during the year. In FY 2013-14, a Contingencies
expenditures category was added to each General Fund program to serve as a contingency for
any unexpected expenditures that might occur during the year. Prior to FY 2020-21, the
contingency amount was derived by taking 5% of the General Fund’s base materials and
contract services to account for unforeseen events and/or activities that were not included in the
respective fiscal year’s budget. In FY 2020-21, and in response to COVID-19, the contingency
amount was cut in half to 2.5% of the General Fund’s base materials and contract services.
Additionally, in FY 2020-21 The City Manager’s contingency established an appropriation
specifically for Public Works’ unforeseen maintenance and repairs in an amount of $280,000.
The current 2.5% calculation is below GFOA’s best practice recommended range of 5-15%;
however, once the Public Works unforeseen maintenance and repair contingency is factored,
the contingency amount ends within the recommended range at 5%. In total, the City
Manager’s contingency budget has remained relatively consistent year-over-year (YOY) as
noted below:
Fiscal Year FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19 FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22
Budget $505,000 $593,661 $486,353 $551,827 $593,250
Actual $240,365 $127,480 $279,337 $283,384 $ -
The City Manager budget unit within the Department of Administration (100-12-120) has
increased from $993,118 (adopted) in FY 2018-19 to $1,521,821 (proposed) in FY 2021-22. This
increase is due to 2.3 additional full-time employees being accounted for in this budget unit.
City Council recommended and adopted a FY 21-22 budget with a City Manager Discretionary
Fund of $75,000.
5. Economic Development has switched to a contract service and has more than doubled in
cost.
RESPONSE: The Economic Development budget is proposed to decrease from $430,494 in FY
2020-21 to $337,074. As the function becomes further defined, staff will bring forward budget
recommendations to City Council for consideration.
51
6. Some committees use staff time (which seems to imply they have a budget amount) and
are not codified: Economic Development Committee, Disaster Council, Fiscal Strategic
Plan Committee. Needs clarification.
RESPONSE: Staff time allocations less than 5% are generally not charged to specific budget
units. In other words, the City would not create a budget unit for Fiscal Strategic Plan
Committee because less than 5% of a respective employee’s annual time is required.
7. Multiple projects which are not approved in the City Council Work Plan show up in the
Proposed Budget: New Logo, online store. Please remove these items from other
headings such as “Contract Services” to a new heading which indicates they are Proposed
Work Plan Items and not approved.
RESPONSE: All City Work Program items will be budgeted and shown as “special projects” in
the final adopted budget. Recording activities in a unique account requires the creation of a
new general ledger account. This is completed once the City Work Program is adopted and the
projects are finalized.
8. Communications costs seems to be a separate area, could this be shown as a group?
RESPONSE: Combining these groups would decrease transparency and also sacrifice historical
data comparisons. OpenGov’s Transparency Portal now has a saved “view” so that the Office of
Communications and the Multimedia budget units can be seen in a combined fashion.
OpenGov Saved View
9. It is unclear how much of the Cultural Events ($402,137) items will occur, such as the 4th
of July celebration. (PB p. 335-336), a similar item, Neighborhood Events ($163,119)
raises the same question (PB p. 350). Total events: $565,256.
RESPONSE: Most of the 4th of July funds are spent the FY before the event, so the money in the
FY 2021-2022 budget will go toward the July 4, 2022. The other events within this account are
Memorial Park Summer Events and Shakespeare in the Park which we are planning for late
summer/early Fall 2021, Tree Lighting which is in December 2021, Big Bunny 5K in March/April
2022, and other small events. The Festivals start in the Fall and continue to Spring. At this time,
we are assuming those will happen.
10. Economic Development was $89,910 for the 2019 actual expenditure and is now
proposed at FY 2022 $337,074 with a new contingency and materials amount of over
$60K with no staffing. Additionally, there is no codified Economic Development
Committee which uses staff time. This area needs attention.
52
RESPONSE: The Economic Development budget is proposed to decrease from $430,494 in FY
2020-21 to $337,074. With the function likely moving “in-house,” staff are recommending a
reduction in this budget unit of $38,694. As the function becomes further defined, staff will
bring forward budget recommendations to City Council for consideration.
11. Please explain the large increase in the BMR affordable housing fund PB p. 393 which
shows an increase of revenue from 2019 actual of $159,179 in taxes to 2022 Proposed
Budget taxes of $3,611,855. There is an allocation of $600,000 shown for Homelessness
and other Special Projects which has not been approved and the City Resolution to
support the county Task Force on Homelessness indicated that the City would participate
in a county-wide program which the City would likely be asked to contribute financially
to.
RESPONSE: Estimated revenues increased due to one-time anticipated Housing Mitigation In-
Lieu Fees for Cupertino Village and De Anza Hotel. The majority of this program’s budget
increase is due to two (2) tentative City Work Program items: $300,000 for Affordable Housing
Strategies and $300,000 for Homeless Services and Facilities. Although the Affordable Housing
Strategies is slated for removal, a $200,000 item for Homeless Jobs Program is slated to be
added.
12. Code Enforcement has increased from $508,167 in 2019 to $1,202,392 proposed 2022.
PB p. 406.
RESPONSE: Full-time employee (FTE) allocations have increased since FY 2018-19 which is
contributing to the increase. Additionally, and because of these relatively large proportional
staffing increases and changes in methodology, the amount of cost allocation charges increased
from $22,478 in FY 2018-19 to $277,786 in the proposed budget year.
13. Facilities would be easier to track if grouped together, Facilities and Fleet next to
Grounds, for example. Where are Stocklmeir, Byrne, Blech?
RESPONSE: The Department’s budget units/programs are organized in order of Division (xxx-
XX-xxx). Because the Fleet or “Fixed Assets Acquisition” program is numbered 630-90-985, it
naturally comes at the end. Changing the accounting structure would be an administrative
challenge and make it more difficult to identity fluctuations year over year. A saved “view” on
OpenGov has been created to see Grounds and Facilities budget units together.
OpenGov Saved View
53
Stocklmeir, Byrne and Blesch are not occupied buildings that are in use. The Facilities budgets
are for maintenance of city buildings that are in use. Any budget allocations for these three
properties would be considered a special project with a specific scope. Additionally, The City’s
budget does not include a comprehensive list of the City’s capital assets for two primary
reasons: 1) it is not a requirement or recommendation by the Government Finance Officer’s
Association (GFOA) and 2) the City strives to keep the budget document as concise as possible.
It is regularly recommended by GFOA to shorten the document as necessary and appropriate.
54
OpenGov: Navigating Reports and Stories
OpenGov is the City of Cupertino’s financial transparency platform. It allows you to explore the
City’s current and historical financial data so you can see what is most interesting to you. You
can drill down to a specific account or scale up to the big picture.
Reports
In the panel on the left, you’ll see a list of reports. On the top left of a report, you’ll see the title
of the current report.
Important reports are described below:
Annual Budget
o Shows the Adopted Budget by fiscal year.
Annual Actuals
o Shows actual data by fiscal year.
Amended Budget
o Shows development of the budget from Adopted Budget to Amended Budget
due to carryovers, encumbrances, and amendments.
Budget vs Actuals
o Shows budget to actual data. Shaded bars represent budget data and solid bars
represent actual data.
Monthly Budget vs Actuals
o Shows actual data broken down by month. Also included is the annual budget.
Staffing
o Shows budgeted positions by fiscal year.
55
Visualization
Each report has a visualization.
On the top right of the visualization, you can switch between graph types. The options include
percentage graph, stacked graph, line graph, pie graph, and bar graph.
Legend
Each visualization has a legend on the right. Click on a category to filter the visualization.
56
At the top of the visualization, you can see how the report is broken down and filtered. For
example, the report below is broken down by Departments and is filtered to General Fund and
Contract Services. Click on the filters to see more or make changes.
Data
Below the visualization, each report has a data table. The data table contains the raw data
behind the graph. Click on a category to drill down and see more detailed information.
57
Below the list of reports in the panel on the left, you’ll see the Filters and Views.
Views
Saved views are built into reports to allow you to navigate the data easily. Saved views are like
bookmarks. The City has created saved views based on common questions it has received.
Filters
If the saved views don’t answer your question, you can customize the filters yourself. You can
choose whether you want to show revenues or expenses, how you want to break down the data,
and how you want to filter the data.
58
Adding or Removing Filters
To add a fund, department, or revenue/expense type to the filter, check the box. To remove a
fund, department, or revenue/expense type, uncheck the box. Click on a fund, department, or
revenue/expense type to drill down to a lower level.
Search
If you can’t find what you’re looking for, you can use the search bar. In the example below, we
search for “library expansion” under Departments. We can then check uncheck “All” and check
“Library Expansion.”
59
Back Button
The Back button allows you to return to the
previous state of the report.
Reset Button
The Reset button returns the report to the original
default state.
Share
The Share button allows you to share the report via
Facebook, Twitter, or Email. You can also download
the visualization as a .png image or download the
data as a .csv spreadsheet.
Stories
In the panel on the left, you’ll see a list of stories. Stories combine narrative with interactive
charts. In a story, click on a graph to explore the linked report.
60
Below is a description of recent stories:
Budget at a Glance
o Brief overview of the City’s budget.
Quarterly Report
o Update on the City’s financial status at the end of each quarter.
Forecast Transparency Tool
o Allows residents to build their own forecast and gain a better understanding of
the factors to consider and the decisions to be made.
Resident Tax Calculator
o Enables residents to estimate the amount of sales and property tax they
contribute to the City, as well as how those revenues are spent.
61
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
21-10257 Agenda Date:
12/13/2021 Agenda #: 5.
Subject: OPEB and Pension Section 115 Trust Discount Rate Sensitivity Analysis
Receive OPEB and Pension Section 115 Trust Discount Rate Sensitivity Analysis
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 12/9/2021Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™62
AUDIT COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
Meeting: December 13, 2021
Subject
OPEB & Pension Trust Investment Policy Review
Recommended Action
Accept staff report and provide recommendations.
Discussion
Background
In FY 2009-10, the City established a Section 115 Trust to help fund its retiree health
obligations, also known as other post-employment benefits (OPEB). In FY 2017-18, the
City also established a Section 115 Trust to pre-fund its pension obligations and reduce
the potential impact of pension cost volatility on the City's operating budget.
The Audit Committee is responsible for reviewing the investment policies for the Section
115 Trusts. On October 22, 2019, the Audit Committee reviewed the investment policies.
It adopted an OPEB Trust Investment Policy with a target rate of return of 6.5% and a
Pension Trust Investment Policy with a target rate of return of 6.25%. The Investment
Manager, US Bank, manages security selection and asset allocation in accordance with the
investment policy.
Section 115 Trust Overview
A Section 115 Trust is a tax-exempt investment tool that allows local governments to pre-
fund pension and retiree health costs. The benefits of a Section 115 Trust include the
following:
Local control over assets: The City controls the contributions, withdrawals,
investment strategy, and risk level of assets in the Trust.
Potential for higher investment returns than General Fund: Investment
requirements that apply to the City's General Fund assets under Government
Code 53601 are not applicable to Trust assets.
63
Pension rate stabilization: Assets can be transferred to CalPERS at the City 's
discretion to pay for Normal Cost or UAL contributions, and can be used to reduce
or eliminate large fluctuations in the City's pension costs.
Diversification: Trust assets will be diversified from CalPERS investments.
OPEB Trust Overview
In FY 2009-10, the City established a Section 115 Trust to help fund its retiree health
obligations, also known as other post-employment benefits (OPEB). Compared to a pay-
as-you-go plan, the OPEB Trust allows the City to:
grow assets to pay future OPEB benefits;
earn higher returns than the General Fund;
reduce its total cost for providing post-employment benefits; and
reduce its net OPEB liability.
As of June 30, 2021, the City's OPEB Trust has a market value of $38.0 million and has
earned an annualized investment return of 8.16% gross of fees since inception.
OPEB Trust Investment Objective
The OPEB Trust has a 'Balanced' investment objective with a target rate of return of 6.5%.
The investment objective is designed to provide a moderate amount of current income
with moderate growth of capital. This objective is recommended for investors with a long-
term time horizon. The strategic asset allocation ranges and tactical targets for this
objective are listed below:
Asset Class Range Target
Fixed Income 20-40% 29%
Equities 50-70% 63%
Real Estate 0-15% 5%
Commodities 0-10% 2%
Cash 0-10% 1%
CalPERS Overview
The City provides a defined benefit pension to its employees through the California Public
Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS). Retiree pensions are calculated using a
formula based on an employee's age, earnings, and years of service, and are funded by a
combination of employer contributions, employee contributions, and investment
earnings. Each year, CalPERS determines an employer's contributions based on actual
investment returns and actuarial assumptions including:
expected investment returns (discount rates),
inflation rates,
salaries,
retirement ages, and
life expectancies.
64
As of the June 30, 2020 actuarial valuation, the City's CalPERS plan has an actuarial
liability of $157.6 million, an unfunded liability of $53.8 million, and a funded ratio of
65.9%. The unfunded liability is the difference between pension assets and liabilities while
the funded ratio is the ratio of pension assets to liabilities.
A defined-benefit plan is considered adequately funded if its assets equal or exceed the
value of its future liabilities. When the funded ratio is lower than 100%, the plan has
insufficient assets to pay all future liabilities. Poor investment returns during the Great
Recession significantly decreased the plan's assets. In addition, enhanced benefits and
actuarial assumption changes due to increased life expectancies increased the plan's
liabilities. These two factors significantly decreased the funded status of the system.
Over the past few years, CalPERS has taken steps to improve the long-term financial
sustainability of the system. In December 2016, the CalPERS board voted to reduce the
discount rate, also known as the assumed rate of return for investments, from 7.5% to 7.0%
over three years from FY 2018-19 to FY 2020-21. In February 2018, the CalPERS board also
voted to decrease the amortization period for new pension liabilities from 30 years to 20
years effective July 1, 2019. While these changes will provide long-term benefits to the
pension plan, they will also increase the City's pension contributions.
Note: Beginning in 2002, investment returns are reported gross of fees.
65
For FY 2020-21, CalPERS reported a preliminary investment return of 21.3%, 14.3
percentage points higher than the 7% discount rate. The average investment return is
10.3% for a 5-year period, 8.5% for a 10-year period, 6.9% for a 20-year period, and 8.4%
for a 30-year period. Given that returns in a given year are volatile, it can be more
instructive to look at returns over longer time horizons.
Time Period Total Investment Return
1 Year 21.3%
5 Year 10.3%
10 Year 8.5%
20 Year 6.9%
30 Year 8.4%
CalPERS Update
Funding Risk Mitigation Policy
Under the "Funding Risk Mitigation Policy," the 21.3% return in FY 2020-21 will trigger a
reduction in the discount rate. The discount rate, or assumed rate of return, will drop
from 7% to 6.8%. The Funding Risk Mitigation Policy, which was approved by the
CalPERS board in 2005, lowers the discount rate in years of good investment returns to
reduce risk in the portfolio. The Risk Mitigation Policy will affect contributions starting
in FY 2023-24.
Asset Liability Management Process
In November 2021, CalPERS completed its Asset Liability Management (ALM) process,
which follows a four-year cycle. The ALM process reviewed investment strategies and
actuarial assumptions. At the November 15-17, 2021, meetings, the CalPERS Board
approved a 6.8% discount rate, selected a new asset allocation for the fund's investment
portfolio, and adopted new actuarial assumptions.
During the ALM process, the board examined different potential portfolios and their
impact on the CalPERS fund. Ultimately, the board selected the portfolio with an
assumed investment return of 6.8%.
Asset Class Current Allocation New Allocation
Global Equity 50% 42%
Fixed Income 28% 30%
Real Assets 13% 15%
Private Equity 8% 13%
Private Debt 0% 5%
Liquidity 1% 0%
Total 100% 105%
The new portfolio includes a 5% allocation to leverage.
66
The investment gain and discount rate reduction will impact the City's pension costs
starting in FY 2023-24. The discount rate reduction partially offsets the effect of the
investment gain. In FY 2027-28, when the investment gain is fully phased in, the City's
annual contributions are expected to be $1.3 million lower than previously projected.
The FY 2020-21 investment gain will also increase the funded status of the City's plan.
As of June 30, 2021, the funded status is 78% with a 7% discount rate and 76% with a
6.8% discount rate.
Employees hired on or after January 1, 2013, following implementation of the Public
Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) will also be affected by the discount rate
reduction. CalPERS expects most PEPRA members to see an increase in their
contribution rate, and the average contribution rate increase is 0.8%.
Pension Trust Overview
Given that pension obligations are one of the City's largest financial obligations, the City
has taken proactive steps to reduce the impacts of pension cost volatility. In March 2018,
the City provided options to Council on addressing rising pension costs. In April 2018,
the City presented a long-term pension funding strategy to the Fiscal Strategic Plan
Committee. In May 2018, the City implemented a Pension Rate Stabilization Program
(PRSP), also known as a Section 115 Trust, to reduce pension rate volatility on the City's
67
budget. The City contributed $8.0 million in FY 2018-19 and $4.0 million in FY 2019-20,
bringing total contributions to $12.0 million. The Pension Trust helps the City to:
grow assets for future pension contributions;
invest assets over appropriate time horizons;
earn higher investment returns than the General Fund;
reduce pension contribution volatility; and
diversify funds from CalPERS investments.
As a fiscal sustainability measure, the City funds the Pension Trust using a more
conservative discount rate of 6.25%. The City's pension funding goal is to accumulate
sufficient funds in the Pension Trust to fund the difference between a 6.25% and a 7%
discount rate and achieve a funded ratio of 80% over 20 years. The City's projections
indicated that the City would need to accumulate over $42 million in the Pension Trust
within 20 years to achieve its pension funding goal.
To achieve this goal, the funding strategy proposed $8.0 million in initial funding, along
with additional funding of $10.0 million over the first five years. The following chart
illustrates the City's progress towards its pension funding goal. The 5% investment return
represents the lowest investment return that would allow the City to achieve its goal. A
6.25% investment return is the current target rate of return of the Pension Trust. The
dotted line represents the actual market value of the City's Pension Trust. The Pension
Trust was funded with an initial contribution of $8.0 million and subsequent contributions
of $4.0 million in FY 2019-20 and $2.0 million in FY 2020-21. As of June 30, 2021, the City's
Pension Trust has a market value of $18.5 million and has earned an annualized
investment return of 15.44% gross of fees since inception. This chart illustrates that the
City is on track towards its pension funding goal.
68
Note: The 5% Investment Return and 6.25% Investment Return projections are for illustrative
purposes only. Actual returns will be different.
Given this strategy and the City's current progress, the City is in a strong position to
withstand the effects of pension cost increases. By using a more conservative discount rate
than CalPERS, the City can allocate more towards pension funding each year than
required by CalPERS. If CalPERS investment returns fall short of assumptions, the City
will be better prepared for future pension cost increases. If CalPERS lowers the discount
rate in the future, the City will be better prepared to absorb these costs.
Pension Trust Investment Objective
The Pension Trust has a 'Balanced' investment objective with a target rate of return of
6.25%. This investment objective is designed to provide a moderate amount of current income
with moderate growth of capital. This objective is recommended for investors with a long-term
time horizon. The strategic asset allocation ranges and tactical targets for this objective
are listed below:
Asset Class Range Target
Fixed Income 20-40% 29%
Equities 50-70% 63%
Real Estate 0-15% 5%
Commodities 0-10% 2%
69
Cash 0-10% 1%
Discount Rate
Defined benefit plans are highly sensitive to the discount rate assumption. The discount
rate is the expected rate of return of the plan's assets over the long term. The discount rate
will depend on the plan's size, asset allocation, time horizon, and other considerations.
The duration of the defined benefit obligation for a retiree health plan is often longer than
that for a pension plan. As a result, the choice of discount rate for OPEB plans can be
higher than for pension plans.
From the City's perspective, the discount rate is important as it is used to determine the
City's annual contributions to the plan, the plan's unfunded liability, and the plan's
funded status. In other words, the discount rate is used to determine whether a plan has
enough assets to meet its future obligations. The discount rate must be realistic to allow
the City to foresee funding issues that may impact future operating budgets and future
generations of retirees and plan members. If the discount rate assumption is too high and
investments earn less than expected, a funding shortfall may result, requiring the City or
CalPERS members to make greater contributions than expected.
OPEB Discount Rate Analysis
The discount rate of the OPEB Trust is currently 6.5%. Under GASB 75, if an OPEB plan
holds investments in a trust specifically to pay for future benefit payments and those
assets are projected to be sufficient to make the projected benefit payments, the discount
rate is based on the long-term expected rate of return for those investments.
The City's OPEB contributions are primarily driven by investment returns and changes
in medical costs. A one percentage point decrease in the discount rate is expected to
increase OPEB contributions by up to $0.7 million per year.
70
CalPERS Discount Rate Analysis
Due to lower-than-historical interest rates and economic growth, market experts project
lower returns for the next several decades. The Pew Research Center forecasts a long-term
investment return of 6.5% for typical pension fund portfolios.
During its Asset Management Liability Process, CalPERS considered discount rates
between 6.25% and 7%. Ultimately, CalPERS approved a discount rate of 6.8%, a decrease
from the previous discount rate of 7%.
71
Note: Projections include FY 2020-21 investment gain of 21.3%.
The discount rate has a significant effect on the City's CalPERS contributions. If the
discount rate is less than the discount rate assumption, the City's CalPERS contributions
will increase. If CalPERS lowers the discount rate by one percentage point, the City's
contributions will increase by up to $2.9 million per year.
This analysis shows the potential contribution impacts if CalPERS were to lower the
discount rate.
Recommendation
The City recommends maintaining the discount rates of 6.50% for the OPEB Trust and
6.25% for the Pension Trust. The discount rates are based on the long-term expected rate
of return for assets in the trusts and the City's time horizon for the investments.
US Bank, the Investment Manager, and PARS, the Trust Administrator, have estimated a
long-term expected return of 6.56% based on the current asset allocation (60%-80%
equities).
The City recommends a higher discount rate for the OPEB Trust than the Pension Trust
because OPEB investments are expected to have a longer time horizon. OPEB obligations
are generally longer in duration and the City expects to withdraw Pension Trust funds
earlier to fund CalPERS contributions. Given that changes to the CalPERS discount rate
72
have larger effects on the City's operating budget and are farther out of the City's control,
it is important that the City be able to use the Trust to pay CalPERS contributions as
needed. A lower discount rate can reduce investment return volatility and reduce the
probability of losses, allowing the City to better preserve its capital.
Sustainability Impact
There is no sustainability impact.
Fiscal Impact
There is no direct fiscal impact at this time. The discount rate assumptions will affect the
City's contributions to the plan, the plan's assets, and the plan's liabilities.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Thomas Leung, Senior Management Analyst
Reviewed by: Zach Korach, Finance Manager
Approved for Submission by: Dianne Thompson, Interim City Manager
Attachments:
A – OPEB Trust Investment Policy
B – Pension Trust Investment Policy
73