ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
General Purpose Fund, Comparison of Financial Position 2024 vs. 2020
Data Sources:
https://oaklandca.opengov.com/transparency#
2
Oakland Fiscal Year (FY) runs July 1 to June 30. For example, FY 2024 means July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kU7PPfHQJIabEi8daOMIqnxQu_CFuQ0V&usp=drive_fs
3
4
2020 GPF Financial Summary
Explanation
5
GPF 2020 budgeted revenue#REF!In FY2020, the City was running a 5.6% operating deficit in the GPF. By 2024, this deficit had expanded by another 11.9% in real dollars due to a decline in revenue (a 5.7% real dollar decline) and an increase in expenses (a 6.2% real dollar increase). The net impact is a $132M structural (ongoing operations) deficit in 2024 (16.9% of budgeted revenues).

When including one-time adjustments (carry over of 2023 expenses) this defict increases to $177M (23.5% of budgeted revenues). But carry-over expenses are not structural deficit because they are just a deferal of unpaid obligations from the prior-year budget. Thus the deficit of primary concern is the structural deficit.

COVID emergency funding masked this structural deficit problem with an influx of federal and state one-time funding (ARPA and CARES), and even exacerbated it by allowing expenses to jump during COVID years. All GPF funded departments saw an average increase in operating expenses of 14% in real dollars since 2020, except for the police which saw a 16% cut, and workforce dev wich saw a 2% cut. These increases generally focused on dramatic expansion of social services, such as (for example) a nutrition program extablished using COVID emergency funding but not subsequently withdrawn after exhaustion of that funding.

This was followed by 'austerity' measures in the 2023-2025 budget to rectify both the starting operating deficit and COVID-era spending expansion. These austerity measures included freezing open positions, declaring a state of "extreme fiscal necessiry" to allow use of Vital Services Stabilization Fund (VSSF) reserves and use of GPF fund balances to cover ongoing operating expenses. (Such reserves, in general, should be used only for one-time expenses.)

However, such austerity measures were insufficient. Revenue expectations in the budget were based on continuation of historically high real-estate transactions and associated taxes, and did not account for the post-COVID business downturn (reduced business licenses, sales taxes, and transient occupancy taxes). Such declines are due to the high interest rates, inflation, and public safety problems.

As a result, the City is forecasted to end the year with a $132M structural deficit. (We note that the ongoing structural deficit is calculated using the ongoing revenues of $711M in 2024, not $721M. The latter includes $10M of one-time monies drawn from the VSSF reserve blance.) Of the $132M structural deficit, only $40M was anticipated in the budgeting process. Thus the City now faces an unresolved $92M operating deficit for 2024.

Because the City is not allowed to run deficits or issue debt to cover such deficits, the unresolved deficit must be addressed through additional operational cuts in the next 3 months, or use of any remaining GPF Fund Balances.

Presently there is only $8M of unassigned GPF fund balance remaining, which may be applied to the deficit under the current 'extreme fiscal necessity' and an additional $65M of GPF Emergency Reserve Funding that has not yet been tapped. That $65M is intended only for extreme seemingly insurmountable events war or a natural disaster. While it is debatable whether the City is in such a situation, the City Council has the power, via a new Resolution, to override the Fiscal Policy it previously set and use those Emergency funds regardless.

While we anticipate that the City will be tempted to do exactly such an act, it is tempered by another issue: it will not resolve the structural deficit. Thus the City will face the full spectre of the $145M total structural defict in 2025, with no emergency reserve funds left to cover it or to cover unanticipated emergencies like natural disasters.

Thus we anticipate that the City will necessarily cut expenses in a dramatic fashion, cuts amounting to approximately 16% of presently budgeted GPF expenses. Such cuts will come on top of departments already running 16% below approved operating staff, and the previously-mentioned 16% real decline in police budget.

Given the severity of such necessary cuts, an even reduction in staff across deparements may not be sufficient. It will be necessary for the city to reconsider whether it can maintain new departments and functions established in the past 5 years.
6
GPF 2020 budgeted expenses#REF!
7
actuals
8
GPF 2020 actual revenue$630,920,000
9
GPF 2020 actual expenses$666,271,934
10
GPF 2020 actual adjusted expenses$689,491,934
11
GPF 2020 actual income-$35,351,934
12
GPF 2020 actual adjusted income-$58,571,934
13
GPF 2020 actual income (relative to actual revenue)-5.6%
14
GPF 2020 actual adjusted income (relative to actual revenue)-9.3%
15
16
2024 GPF Financial Summary
17
GPF 2024 budgeted revenue, including use of 2023 fund balance$834,121,344
18
GPF 2024 budgeted expenses$834,121,344
19
Fiscal year end forecast (estimated on March 6, 2024)
20
GPF 2024 forecasted revenue (with use of reserves)$721,000,000
includes 10M use of VSSF reserves
21
GPF 2024 forecasted expenses$842,840,000
22
GPF 2024 forecasted adjusted expenses (with carry-overs)$898,080,000
includes $55M of carry-overs & unplanned expenses
23
GPF 2024 forecasted income-$121,840,000
2024 operational deficit
24
GPF 2024 forecasted income (excluding one-time use of VSSF)-$132,140,000
structural deficit
25
GPF 2024 forecasted adjusted income-$177,080,000
total deficit including carry-overs
26
GPF 2024 forecasted income (relative to actual revenue)-16.9%
structural deficit
27
GPF 2024 forecasted adjusted income (relative to actual revenue)-24.6%
total deficit including carry-overs paid by prior-year fund balance
28
2024 Use of Funds for budgeted for operating expenses$30,120,000
transfer from 2023 year-end GPF fund balance
29
2024 Use of Funds for carry overs$55,240,000
transfer from 2023 year-end GPF fund balance
30
Forecasted June 30, 2024 GPF net position without mitigating actions
-$91,720,000
unresolved deficit
31
32
Emergency funds available
33
Remaining General Fund Balance$7,920,000
34
GPF Emergency Reserve$65,410,000
35
Remaining deficit if fully consume of one-time emergency reserves-$18,390,000
the City has not yet decided to do this as of March 2024
36
37
38
39
2024 DEFICIT COMPONENTS - SUMMARY
40
in 2020 dollars
41
42
Structural deficit componentRelative to 2020 actual revenues
43
Starting income (2020 actuals)-5.6%
initial structural deficit (actual revenue vs actual expense)
44
Revenue change (2024 v 2020)-5.7%
2024 forecasted revenue vs 2020 actual revenue
45
Expense change (2024 v 2020)6.2%
2024 forecasted expenses vs 2020 actual expense
46
Forecasted 2024 relative net income-17.5%
relative to 2020 revenue basis
47
48
Total deficit component
49
2024 adjusted expense additions7.3%
2024 carry-over expense vs 2024 forecasted expenses
50
Forecasted 2024 relative adjusted net income-24.9%
51
52
53
in 2024 dollars
54
55
Structural deficit componentRelative to 2024 budgeted revenues
56
Starting income (2020 actuals)-5.1%
initial structural deficit (actual revenue vs actual expense)
57
Revenue change (2024 v 2020)-5.2%
2024 forecasted revenue vs 2020 actual revenue
58
Expense change (2024 v 2020)5.6%
2024 forecasted expenses vs 2020 actual expense
59
Forecasted 2024 relative net income-15.8%
relative to 2020 revenue basis
60
61
Total deficit component
62
2024 adjusted expense additions5.4%
2024 carry-over expense vs 2024 forecasted expenses
63
Forecasted 2024 relative adjusted net income-21.2%
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100