Wednesday, 12 May 2010 02:59

AWA Sees Third Quarter Expenses, Revenues Both Down

Written by 
Rate this item
(0 votes)
slide4-awa_sees_third_quarter_expenses_revenues_both_down.pngAmador County – The Amador Water Agency board will get a third quarter financial report Thursday, which will help determine how much money the agency should seek in a loan from the county to ease a cash shortage. Finance Manager Mike Lee prepared a report for the quarter budget review for the period ending March 31st, and likely will give a presentation on the report. Water sales and other revenue are down a total of 11 percent over the fiscal year, with total operating revenue in the hole by $924,000. Lee said in the report that “water sales are below budget projections through March because Lake Camanche is billed every other month, the budgeted rate has not been adopted, and this is a low water use time of year.” “Other operating revenue,” down $200,000, is under budget because Pacific Gas & Electric’s “payment was lower than projected and we have not made any transfer from reserves through March,” Lee said. Operating expenses were down by $1,080,000, or 13 percent overall, led by a 75 percent drop in “reserve contributions and contingencies,” down by $188,000. The report said O&M spending was under budget “because distribution and treatment plant costs are lower than budgeted and payment to Sutter Creek for treatment and/or disposal has not been made.” Administration costs were down by $158,000 or 21 percent, Lee said, because the agency has spent “less on consultants, software licensing and or support and training than expected through March.” Debt service spending was down by nearly $500,000 because a second payment had not yet been made on the “2006 Series A” bonds. Non-operating revenue was under budget by $4.5 million, or 47 percent, because the agency had “not received funding for the (Gravity Supply Line), Backwash Pond upgrade or Camanche tank projects.” Capital salaries were below budget by $350,000 “because less time was charged to capital projects than anticipated.” Capital expenditures were down by $5.5 million (or 67 percent), Lee said, “because we have not incurred the level of capital construction through March.” A cash balance comparison” between this fiscal year and 2008-2009 showed the cash down to about $2 million for the last 6 months, including may, where last year it was $2.7 million and this May it was shown at $705,000. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Read 443 times Last modified on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 06:16
Tom