City Council Meeting Agenda
September 8, 2025

City of Culver City
Staff Report
Mike Balkman Council
Chambers
9770 Culver Blvd.

Culver City, CA 90232
File #: 25-1479, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.

CC - ACTION ITEM: (1) Receipt and Discussion of List of Capital Improvements Projects to Consider Defunding in Order to Fund a Potential One-Time $2.5 Million Donation to the Culver City Unified School District (CCUSD); (2) Receipt and Discussion of Report on the Impact of a Potential One-Time $2.5 Million Donation to CCUSD from the City’s Contingency Reserve; and (3) Direction to the City Manager as Deemed Appropriate.

Meeting Date: August 11, 2025
Contact Person/Dept.: Lisa Soghor, Chief Financial Officer Elizabeth Shavelson, Assistant Chief Financial Officer
Phone Number: City Manager’s Office - (310) 253-6000
Fiscal Impact: Yes [X] No [] General Fund: Yes [X] No [] Attachments: Yes [X] No []
Public Notification: (E-Mail) Meetings and Agendas - City Council (08/07/2025) Department Approval: John Nachbar, City Manager (08/07/2025) _____________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council (1) receive and discuss a list of Capital Improvements Projects to consider defunding in order to fund a potential one-time $2.5 million donation to the Culver City Unified School District (CCUSD); (2) receive and discuss a report on the impact of a potential one- time $2.5 million donation to CCUSD from the City’s Contingency Reserve; and (3) provide direction to the City Manager as deemed appropriate.

BACKGROUND
At the June 16, 2025 meeting of the Culver City Unified School District - City Council Liaison Subcommittee meeting, representatives from Culver City United School District (CCUSD) requested City funding to help fill its budget shortfall. The Subcommittee subsequently voted to put consideration of the issue on the City Council agenda.

CCUSD presented two potential City funding scenarios:

City of Culver City Printed on 8/7/2025Page 1 of 5
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-1479, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.
· $7.5 million for 3 years, beginning in Fiscal Year 2025-2026 · $2.5 million for 3 years, beginning in Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Under both scenarios, CCUSD offered the City expanded public use of CCUSD facilities, including the maintenance and staffing necessary to open school campuses to the public during non-school hours, and additional flexibility for CCUSD to host City Parks, Recreation and Community Services programming. These uses would be documented in the City’s Memorandum of Understanding with CCUSD, which is currently in the process of being negotiated.

CCUSD described the impact of the City’s funding as giving it time to implement creative revenue generating solutions while maintaining a positive budget certification from the State, continuing benefits for employees, and retaining priority interventions. According to CCUSD, funding at the higher, $7.5 million level would allow CCUSD to avoid major budget cuts, maintain some essential educators for priority interventions, and avoid drawdown of redevelopment funding.

CCUSD cites the following as factors negatively influencing its budget: reduced state discretionary block grants, loss of Federal funding based on changes at the US Department of Education: Title IIA and Title III, increased operational costs, and lower revenue. In response, CCUSD has implemented austerity measures including staff layoffs in 2024 and 2025. They state that the continuation of benefits for employees is at risk. They are unable to meet their state mandated reserves level of at least 3%, which may result in County Office of Education (COE) intervention.

At the July 14, 2025 City Council Meeting, the City Council considered the request from CCUSD and directed staff to return with: 1) a list of capital improvements projects that could be defunded in order to fund a potential one-time $2.5 million donation to CCUSD; and 2) a report on the impact of a potential one-time $2.5 million donation to CCUSD from the City’s Contingency Reserve. A copy of the July 14, 2025 staff report including attachments is provided as Attachment 1.

DISCUSSION
Capital Improvements Projects
The City uses a variety of funding sources to fund its Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) including but not limited to Refuse Disposal Fund, Municipal Bus Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund, Cultural Arts Fund, Gas Tax, Prop C Local Return Measure M Local Return, Measure R Local Return, and Capital Grants. The City also uses the General Fund, including the Committed General Fund Reserves for Facilities Planning and Recreational Facilities, to fund CIPs.

The General Fund is the least restrictive source of funds and can be used for any City purpose. The use of General Fund Committed Reserves is more restrictive as established by Council Policy 5002.

Policy Statement 5002 includes a Financial Reserves Policy section which lays out the maintenance of some portion of funds available to be reserved for future use. As part of the policy, the City Council established the Facilities Planning Reserve and the Recreational Facilities Reserve within the City’s General Fund balance. The Facilities Planning Reserve was established to offset the costs of replacement or major refurbishment to critical City facilities. The Recreation Facilities Reserve was established to set aside recreational class and rental revenues for the refurbishment of certain recreational facilities, programs and equipment. These General Fund Committed Reserves can only City of Culver City Printed on 8/7/2025Page 2 of 5
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-1479, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.
recreational facilities, programs and equipment. These General Fund Committed Reserves can only be used for specific purposes pursuant to constraints imposed by formal action by the City Council and remain binding unless removed in the same manner.

Staff has examined all the City’s active CIPs currently funded with contributions from the City’s General Fund, General Fund Facilities Planning Reserve and General Fund Recreational Facilities Reserve. An overview of these CIP projects identified for defunding consideration including the project status and estimated remaining balance is provided in Attachment 2.

This list includes projects for maintenance and repair as well as facility upgrades to address the City’s aging facilities. If selected for defunding, these rehabilitation projects will likely need to be revisited in the near-term to prevent further and more costly repair or replacement work in future years. The list also includes road and bicycle improvements, sidewalk repairs, park enhancements, and technology infrastructure.

The remaining balance for each CIP shown in Attachment 2 is an estimate based on expenditures posted to date in the City’s financial system. The City is currently in the midst of closing Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and is still processing invoices from Departments. The actual CIP balances remaining may be lower than current expenditures indicate once all invoices are accounted for.

Finance staff worked with City departments to evaluate the status of these CIPs focusing on those funded by the General Fund not the Committed Reserves. Staff has identified $1,082,902 of bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects approved in previous fiscal years that would be eligible to be funded from the new Mobility Improvement Fund (Fund 437) instead of the General Fund. As of August 11, 2025, the estimated fund balance for Fund 437 is approximately $2 million.

Staff has highlighted an additional $1,425,354 in CIPs that could be defunded. Some of these projects have been completed or are not currently moving forward. This information is outlined in the project status column of Attachment 2. Some other projects may be in preliminary stages and could be more easily revisited later. Staff recommends that City Council review the list and provide direction.

If Council approves CIP projects for reallocation and/or defunding, staff will return to City Council with an item to authorize a budget amendment to reallocate and/or defund the projects identified and appropriate funds for a donation to CCUSD. A budget amendment requiring a four-fifths vote will be necessary. Depending on the projects selected, a Council resolution may also be necessary to reallocate funds from the City’s Committed Reserves for General Fund Facilities Planning and General Fund Recreational Facilities to be used for the City’s donation to the CCUSD.

Contingency Reserve
As part of Policy Statement 5002, the City Council established the Contingency Reserve, a committed fund balance within the City’s General Fund balance.

Section VIII.C.1 of the Financial Reserves Policy states “The Contingency Reserve shall have a target balance of thirty percent (30%) of General Fund “Operating Budget” as originally adopted.

Operating Budget for this purpose shall include current expenditure appropriations and shall exclude Capital Improvement Projects and Transfers Out. Appropriation and/or access to these funds are City of Culver City Printed on 8/7/2025Page 3 of 5
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-1479, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.
reserved for emergency situations only.”
The Financial Reserves Policy provides that reserve funds, including the Contingency Reserve, will not be spent for any function other than the specific purpose of the Reserve account from which they are drawn without specific direction in the annual budget or by a separate City Council action. The Financial Reserves Policy also states that a portion of a fund balance that includes amounts that can only be used for specific purposes remain binding unless removed in the same manner they were established.

On June 9, 2025, Council adopted Resolution 2025-R052 amending Policy Statement 5002 to establish a committed reserve for loan to Community Corp of Santa Monica toward construction of affordable housing units in the Jubilo Village Project located at 4464 Sepulveda Boulevard. The $12 million needed to fund the Jubilo Village Reserve was reallocated from the Contingency Reserve.

Council adopted Resolution 2025-R051 authorizing a decrease to the Contingency Reserve below the established target for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 in order to reallocate funds.

Based on the Adopted General Fund Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 of $192.7 million, the target Contingency Reserve is approximately $57.8 million. Based on the estimated Fiscal Year 2024-2025 revenues and expenditures at the time of budget preparation, the Contingency Reserve is estimated to be $41.4 million, approximately 21.5% of the City’s operating budget.

The Contingency Reserve balance is an estimate at the time of budget adoption. The City’s actual Contingency Reserve balance will be determined once the City has closed Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and the City’s auditors have issued the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report.

Drawing an additional $2.5 million from the City’s Contingency Reserve to fund a $2.5 million contribution to CCUSD will further reduce the City’s estimated Contingency Reserve balance to $38.9 million, approximately 20.2% of the City’s operating budget.

If the City Council desires to use funds from the City’s Contingency Reserve towards a $2.5 million donation to CCUSD, a resolution authorizing the use and the decrease in the Contingency Reserve is required. If given this direction, staff will return to Council with a resolution for Council adoption at a future meeting as well as a budget amendment to appropriate funds for a donation to CCUSD. A budget amendment requiring a four-fifths vote will be necessary.

Per Policy Statement 5002, the City Manager shall present a plan to City Council to replenish the Contingency Reserve within five years. Resolution 2025-R051 directed the City Manager to present such plan within six months of the adoption of the Resolution. Staff is planning to return to City Council by December 2025 with a plan following the City Council’s June 9, 2025 action.

If Council directs staff to bring back a resolution to further decrease the Contingency Reserve, staff will incorporate this action into its replenishment plan. The replenishment plan will likely include expenditure reduction measures including defunding CIP projects, freezing or eliminating staff positions, reducing service levels and reducing City programs. The extent of the expenditures reductions to be identified in the replenishment plan will likely depend on the outcome of the August 26 Municipal Election.

City of Culver City Printed on 8/7/2025Page 4 of 5
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-1479, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.

FISCAL ANALYSIS
In the Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-2026, General Fund expenditures exceed General Fund revenues by $22.1 million and require the use of the City’s General Fund reserve balances to make up the deficit. The City’s General Fund has no remaining unassigned balance for Fiscal Year 2025- 2026. The City’s Contingency Reserve (meant for emergencies) is projected to be approximately $41.4 million at the end of Fiscal Year 2025-2026. This balance is only 21.5% of the General Fund Operating Budget, which is below the City’s target goal of 30%. Regardless of the outcome of the August 26, 2025 election for the 0.25% sales tax measure, the City will need to consider further budget reductions to address its structural deficit and allow full funding of the City’s Contingency Reserve.

Staff has identified $1,082,902 of bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects approved in previous fiscal years that would be eligible to be funded from the new Mobility Improvement Fund (Fund 437) instead of the General Fund. As of August 11, 2025, the estimated fund balance for Fund 437 is approximately $2 million. Reallocating these projects to Fund 437 would leave just under $1 million for other projects. Staff has highlighted an additional $1,425,354 in General Fund CIPs that could be defunded. Drawing on special funds and canceling some CIPs would enable the City to make a one- time $2.5 million donation to CCUSD.

ATTACHMENTS

1. 2025-08-11 ATT 1 July 14, 2025 Staff Report with attachments

2. 2025-08-11 ATT 2 Overview of CIP Projects currently funded with General Fund, General Fund Facilities Planning Reserve and General Fund Recreational Facilities Reserve funds

MOTION(S)
That the City Council:

1. Review and discuss the list of capital improvement projects and, if desired, identify projects to defund; and request the City Manager to return to City Council with a budget amendment and other actions as necessary to fund a donation to CCUSD;

2. Review and discuss the impact of a potential one-time $2.5 million donation to CCUSD from the City’s Contingency Reserve and, if desired, direct the City Manager to return to City Council with a budget amendment and other actions as necessary to fund a donation to CCUSD; and

3. Provide direction to the City Manager as deemed appropriate.

City of Culver City Printed on 8/7/2025Page 5 of 5
powered by Legistar™
City of Culver City
Staff Report
Mike Balkman Council
Chambers
9770 Culver Blvd.

Culver City, CA 90232
File #: 25-1339, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.

CC - ACTION ITEM: (1) Consideration of a Request from Culver City Unified School District for $2.5 Million to $7.5 Million Per Year from the City of Culver City from Fiscal Year 2025-2026 through Fiscal Year 2027-2028; and (2) Provide Direction to the City Manager as Deemed Appropriate.

Meeting Date: July 14, 2025
Contact Person/Dept.: Jesse Mays, Assistant City Manager Phone Number: City Manager’s Office - (310) 253-6000
Fiscal Impact: Yes [X] No [] General Fund: Yes [X] No [] Attachments: Yes [X] No []
Public Notification: (E-Mail) Meetings and Agendas - City Council (07/10/2025) Department Approval: John Nachbar, City Manager (07/08/2025) _____________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council (1) consider a request from Culver City Unified School District for $2.5 Million to $7.5 million per year from the City of Culver City from Fiscal Year 2025-2026 through Fiscal Year 2027-2028; and (2) provide direction to the City Manager as deemed appropriate.

BACKGROUND
At the June 16, 2025 meeting of the Culver City Unified School District - City Council Liaison Subcommittee meeting, representatives from Culver City United School District (CCUSD) requested City funding to help fill its budget shortfall. CCUSD’s presentation from the meeting is attached (Attachment 1). The Subcommittee subsequently voted to put consideration of this issue on an upcoming City Council agenda.

CCUSD has presented two potential City funding scenarios:
· $7.5 million for 3 years, beginning in Fiscal Year 2025-2026 · $2.5 million for 3 years, beginning in Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Under both scenarios, CCUSD offered the City expanded public use of CCUSD facilities, including City of Culver City Printed on 7/10/2025Page 1 of 5
powered by Legistar™
Attachment 1
File #: 25-1339, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.

Under both scenarios, CCUSD offered the City expanded public use of CCUSD facilities, including the maintenance and staffing necessary to open school campuses to the public during non-school hours, and additional flexibility for CCUSD to host City Parks, Recreation and Community Services programming. These would be documented in the City’s Memorandum of Understanding with CCUSD, which is currently in the process of being negotiated.

CCUSD described the impact of the City’s funding as giving it time to implement creative revenue generating solutions while maintaining a positive budget certification from the State, continuing benefits for employees, and retaining priority interventions. According to CCUSD, funding at the higher, $7.5 million level would allow CCUSD to avoid major budget cuts, maintain some essential educators for priority interventions, and avoid drawdown of redevelopment funding.

CCUSD cites the following as factors negatively influencing its budget: reduced state discretionary block grants, loss of Federal funding based on changes at the US Department of Education: Title IIA and Title III, increased operational costs, and lower revenue. In response, CCUSD has implemented austerity measures including staff layoffs in 2024 and 2025. They state that the continuation of benefits for employees is at risk. They are unable to meet their state mandated reserves level of at least 3%, which may result in County Office of Education (COE) intervention.

DISCUSSION
Current City Funding to CCUSD
The City’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 includes the following funding for CCUSD:
· Refuse Services $337,500
· Sewer Charges $60,000
· CCUSD Crossing Guards $550,000
· Walk ‘n Rollers Contract $40,000
· Timing System for Plunge $45,000
TOTAL $1,032,500
The City has also allocated General Fund dollars to fund CIP Project PZ941 (Safe Routes to School).

As part of the July 14 Agenda, Council will consider approving a professional services agreement to prepare a Tri-School Traffic Study in the amount of $285,200.

In addition, in Fiscal Year 2024-2025, the City’s Transportation Department subsidized travel for CCUSD students including providing student transportation to and from school and school field trips for a total estimated cost of $1,429,345,. However, most of this funding is not from the City’s General Fund, but rather, from Federal or other funding sources. This program is anticipated to continue in Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

City Funding for School Districts
School districts are funded by a variety of revenues sources:

City of Culver City Printed on 7/10/2025Page 2 of 5
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-1339, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.
· Property Taxes
o On average, school districts receive 35% of the property tax revenues collected within the district boundaries.
· State Aid
o Revenue provided by the state (the source of which is mainly state income taxes and some sales taxes) to make-up the difference between the amount per student resulting from the school district’s property tax income and the minimum amount per student as established by the state.
· Federal Revenue
o Funding restricted to special education, which is based on the number of special education students, and per-student funding for Title 1-5 students, in which case funding is restricted to those students.
· Other State Revenue
· Other Local Revenue
o Parcel taxes, leases and rentals, interest earnings on the school district’s general fund, foundation donations, and pass through of sales tax measures.

In April 2025, the City engaged Cathy Dominico from Ryland Strategic Business Consulting to provide an overview of school district funding and COE oversight for California school districts including mechanisms available to schools to augment funding when budgetary shortfalls are identified (Attachment 2).

According to Dominico, “It is uncommon for cities to provide substantial unrestricted operating funds to their local school districts.” The funding that City of Santa Monica provides to the Santa Monica- Malibu Unified School District (SMMUSD) has been held-up as an example for Culver City increasing its financial support. Approximately 20-25% of the SMMUSD’s unrestricted funding comes from the City of Santa Monica. However, Dominico states that “this contribution from a city is quite unique” and even though she works in over 150 school districts in the state, “I am not aware of another district in California that receives significant unrestricted funding from their local city.” Culver City’s current funding level is “more in line with other cities in California”.

Attachment 3 is General Fund Income Data from 2023-2024 for Unified School Districts within Los Angeles County, taken from the 2023-2024 LA County Public School Financial Report published by the COE. The data shows that overall, Unified School Districts in LA County received 6.70% of their annual revenue from “Other Local Revenue” (not 32-36%, as shown on page 4 of Attachment 1).

CCUSD received 8.51% of its annual revenue from “Other Local Revenue,” which is greater than the overall total for Unified School Districts in LA County. Santa Monica-Malibu and San Marino Unified School Districts, at 35.78% and 30.77% respectively, are outliers.

The City of Santa Monica’s highly unusually annual contribution to the School District is largely a result of voter approved initiatives. The City of Santa Monica’s approximately $10 million annual contribution (which contributes to the high percentage of Other Local Revenue) is due to Santa Monica’s Measure YY, approved by voters in 2010. Measure YY was an advisory measure asking voters to approve earmarking to the school district one-half of a proposed half-cent sales tax increase (which appeared on the same 2010 ballot as Measure Y, a measure to impose a half-cent sales tax in the City of Santa Monica). In 2022, Santa Monica voters approved Measure GS, a “mansion tax,” increasing the documentary transfer tax rate on the transfers of real property valued at $8 million or more. The language of Measure GS specifically earmarks the first $10 million raised by the tax to the City of Culver City Printed on 7/10/2025Page 3 of 5
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-1339, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.
more. The language of Measure GS specifically earmarks the first $10 million raised by the tax to the school district. In contrast, Culver City voters have not approved earmarking a portion of any City sales tax or documentary transfer tax to the school district. However, voters in both Santa Monica and Culver City have passed parcel tax measures to provide additional funding to local schools.

CCUSD’s Options for its Budget Shortfall
“School districts typically obtain augmented funding independently from their own taxpayers,” wrote Dominico. CCUSD could seek voter approval for a parcel tax, which is a tax charged per unit of property. In California, parcel taxes are considered special taxes and require a two-thirds (66.67%) vote for approval.

CCUSD voters have previously shown strong support for parcel tax measures benefiting CCUSD. In 2018, CCUSD voters approved Measure K by a vote of 75.38% to 24.62%, which levied a parcel tax for seven years at a rate of $189 per parcel per year. In 2024, CCUSD voters approved Measure O by a vote of 83.44% to 16.56%, which extended the $189 annual parcel tax for an additional eight years.

The Measure O parcel tax of $189 per parcel per year raises approximately $2.4 million annually for the school district. An additional parcel tax of $197 per parcel per year might generate an additional $2.5 million annually. A parcel tax of $591 per parcel per year might generate an additional $7.5 million annually.

There is recent precedent for California school district parcel taxes with similar or higher rates. In 2024 alone, voters approved the following parcel taxes in California:

School District $/Year for Parcel w/1,500 SF Structure
Alameda Unified School District $878
Berkeley Unified School District $810
Davis Joint Unified School District $768
Piedmont Unified School District $750
Nicasio School District $748
Lakeside Joint School District $647
Culver City - $7.5 Million (Hypothetical) $591
Culver City - $2.5 Million (Hypothetical) $197
Another option for revenue generation would be expanded leasing of CCUSD property. The 2024- 2025 CCUSD Budget projects revenues from leases and rentals of $1.525 million.

Analysis of CCUSD’s Budget Shortfall
Dominico’s analysis of CCUSD’s budget situation in April 2025 was that “although CCUSD is facing some financial challenges, their financial picture is projected to improve.” She believes that COE intervention, which includes assignment of a fiscal advisor and development of a fiscal recovery plan, can help a district balance its budget and avoid a larger financial problem. In the event of COE involvement:
“It is likely that the COE will recommend a fiscal recovery plan that identifies sufficient budget cuts to bring the ending fund balance back up to the minimum 3% reserve requirement. If the City of Culver City Printed on 7/10/2025Page 4 of 5
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-1339, Version: 1 Item #: A-2.
cuts to bring the ending fund balance back up to the minimum 3% reserve requirement. If the fiscal recovery plan is not sufficient, the COE will likely assign a fiscal advisor to assist the District in identifying the improvements to the budget to achieve a 3% minimum reserve.

Although the County Superintendent does have “stay” and “rescind” power for districts in financial distress, this power is typically used when a county superintendent believes the board’s action might jeopardize the school district’s financial stability. They do not typically intervene unless it is an extreme situation. It is not until a school district takes an emergency state loan that the school board would lose control of district operations.”

FISCAL ANALYSIS
In the Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-2026, General Fund expenditures exceed General Fund revenues by $22.1 million and require the use of the City’s General Fund reserve balances to make up the deficit. The City’s General Fund has no remaining unassigned balance for Fiscal Year 2025- 2026. The City’s Contingency Reserve (meant for emergencies) is projected to be approximately $41.4 million at the end of Fiscal Year 2025-2026. This balance is only 21.6% of the General Fund Operating Budget, which is below the City’s target goal of 30%. Regardless of the outcome of the August 26, 2025 election for the 0.25% sales tax measure, the City will need to consider further budget reductions to address its structural deficit and allow full funding of the City’s Contingency Reserve.

Both CCUSD and the City are facing budget challenges, where tough choices will need to be made by both organizations. The funding commitment CCUSD is requesting would require the City to reduce the level of City services.. Should the City Council decide to provide ongoing funding to CCUSD, Council should direct staff which City programs and/or services should be reduced to fund this new, ongoing obligation. If the City Council desires to provide funding for CCUSD in Fiscal Year 2025-2026, a budget amendment requiring a four-fifths vote would be necessary.

ATTACHMENTS

1. 2025-07-14 ATT Liaison Meeting 6.16 CCUSD Presentation

2. 2025-07-14 ATT School District Funding Memo

3. 2025-07-14 ATT LA County Public Schools Financial Report Excerpt

MOTION(S)
That the City Council:

1. Consider the request from Culver City Unified School District for $2.5 Million to $7.5 million per year from the City of Culver City from Fiscal Year 2025-2026 through Fiscal Year 2027-2028; and

2. If approved, direct the City Manager to return to City Council with a budget amendment, including providing direction on the source of the funding and potential expenditure offsets.

City of Culver City Printed on 7/10/2025Page 5 of 5
powered by Legistar™
IntroductionIntentCommittee OverviewGovernance Calendar (simplified)GuestsQuestions CUL VER CITY TOGETHERSuccess for all... Takes us all!
Culver City is a destination district:Families choose Culver City because of our successful independentschool system

IntroductionIntentCommittee OverviewGovernance Calendar (simplified)GuestsQuestions Second Interim Report Summary:Qualified Budget CertificationLAST LIAISON MEETING REVIEW •March 15 Reduction in Force (RIF) of 39 Full Time Employees (in addition to 2024 RIF)•Austerity measures implemented•Continuation of benefits for employees is at risk•Needed +$1M/year to attain Positive Budget Certification 3% reserves CA State Budget Certification•To stay fiscally stable, districts work to maintain POSITIVE certification status by submiting budget reports that meet 3% reserves over the next three years•Both QUALIFIED and NEGATIVE certifications trigger interventions designed to correct the fiscal trajectory, ranging from external reviews to RECEIVERSHIP•RECEIVERSHIP occurs when the district requires a loan to stay operational. During receivership, the Board and Superintendent lose control of operations and a state administrator is assigned to take charge. This process often results in the closing of schools.New Factors InfluencingDistrict Budgeting•Reduced State Discretionary Block Grant•Loss of Federal funding based on changes at the US Dept of Education: Title IIA and Title III•Increased operational costs/lower revenue IntroductionIntentCommittee OverviewGovernance Calendar (simplified)GuestsQuestions CCUSD Reserve
We only meet reserve through reallocation of RDA dollars (which expire at the end of 27-28 school year) AND $4M in cuts annually through 27-28. Otherwise, our budget is negative.Current State of BudgetFor 2024-25:Reserve without additional dollars = 0.46%Reserve using RDA dollars = 3.0%For 2025-26:Reserve without additional dollars = 0.29%Reserve with additional dollars = 3.11% IntroductionIntentCommittee OverviewGovernance Calendar (simplified)GuestsQuestions CCUSD’S GENERAL FUND HAS ONL Y5% LOCAL REVENUETHIS IS VERY LOW IN COMPARISON TO THE32-36% LOCAL REVENUEMOST CA SCHOOL DISTRICTS RECEIVEHistorical School Funding across California •Local Funding: 32-36%•State Funding:54-64%•Federal Funding:6-23%* CCUSD 2025-2026 Budget ProposalGeneral Fund Revenue Sources Source: School Services of California
JUNE 10, 2025 BUDGET PROPOSAL HAS MAJOR IMPACT TO STUDENT OUTCOMES IntroductionIntentCommittee OverviewGovernance Calendar (simplified)GuestsQuestions 2025 CDE required Fiscal Stability Plan (FSP) is a stop gap•One-time unconventional $3.2Mdrawdown on restricted Redevelopment (RDA) funds•Further painful RIFs and austerity measures of at least$4Mare necessary to meet 3% state mandated reserves and avoid state interventionsIt may be necessary to discontinue crucial support and narrow popular offerings such as•Tutoring & Interventions•Electives & Advanced Placement Classes•Enrichment & Activities Reductions of essential positions to be considered•Administrative Staff•Health and Wellbeing Services

CITY - USDPARTNERSHIPS

SCHOOL COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR SALES TAXJOINT USE AGREEMENT UPDA TEINCLUDE MONETARY COMPONENT SMALL EXPENDITURE RELIEF100% SRTS +$30KGO PASS +$49KFAST TRACK PAID EVENT PARKING MECHANISMSADVERTISING TO INCREASE ENROLLMENTSHARE GRANT WRITING EXPERTISE Partnerships to RET AIN Culver City’s destination district distinction SMMUSD’S JUA IS $10M+ PER YEAR
IntroductionIntentCommittee OverviewGovernance Calendar (simplified)GuestsQuestions A Joint Use Partnership that RETAINSCulver City’s destination district distinction CITY’S CONTRIBUTION:$7.5M/YEARFOR 3 YEARS CITY IMPACT:PUBLIC ENJOYS EXPANDED USE OF FACILITIES INCLUDES⚬MAINTENANCE AND STAFFING OF FACILITIES⚬MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR CCUSD TO HOST PRCS PROGRAMS CCUSD IMPACT:THRIVING YOUTH THROUGH⚬POSITIVE BUDGET CERTIFICATION⚬CONTINUED BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES⚬RETENTION OF ESSENTIAL EDUCATORS FOR PRIORITY INTERVENTIONS IntroductionIntentCommittee OverviewGovernance Calendar (simplified)GuestsQuestions CITY’S CONTRIBUTION:$2.5M/YEARFOR 3 YEARS CITY IMPACT:PUBLIC ENJOYS EXPANDED USE OF FACILITIES INCLUDES⚬MAINTENANCE AND STAFFING OF FACILITIES⚬MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR CCUSD TO HOST PRCS PROGRAMS CCUSD IMPACT:BUYS TIME TO IMPLEMENT CREATIVE REVENUE GENERATINGSOLUTIONS⚬POSITIVE BUDGET CERTIFICATION⚬CONTINUED BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES⚬RETAINS A FEW PRIORITY INTERVENTIONS⚬RDA DRAWDOWN AND MAJOR REDUCTIONS STILL REQUIRED Reduced Level Joint Use Partnership
IntroductionIntentCommittee OverviewGovernance Calendar (simplified)GuestsQuestions THANK YOU!Success for all... Takes us all!
Partner with us to retain Culver City’s destination district distinctionand families will continue to choose Culver City because of our successful independent school systemPlease consider convening a future special joint sessionwith both bodies (the entire council and school board) to discuss this important item together - as is the practice in many independent municipalities

8334 Parus Way, Granite Bay, California 95746
Office (916) 652-7165 Fax (916) 652-7168 www.rylandsbc.com

To: Lisa Soghor, Chief Financial Officer
Elizabeth Shavelson, Assistant Chief Financial Officer

From: Cathy Dominico

Date: April 14, 2025

Re: School District Funding and Co unty Office of Education Oversight

Lisa and Liz,

As we discussed, I have prepar ed this memorandum to provide you with an overview of county office of education oversight for California school districts and mechanisms available to schools to augment funding when budgetary shortfalls are identified.

AB 1200

School districts in California are required to file two reports during a fiscal year (interim reports) on the status of the district’s financial health. The first interim report is due December 15 for the period ending October 31. The second interim report is due March 17 for the period ending January 31.

The interim reports must include a certification of whether or not the school district is able to meet its financial obligations. The certifications are classified as “positive”, “qualified”, or “negative”.

 A “positive” certification is assigned when th e district will meet its financial obligations for the current and two subsequent fiscal years.
 A “qualified” certification is assigned when the district may not meet its financial obligations for the current or two subsequent fiscal years.  A “negative” certification is assigned when a district will be unable to meet its financial obligations for the remainder of the current year or for the subsequent fiscal year.

The number of districts deemed “qualified” or “n egative” each year is dependent on economic conditions. For example, as one time money from COVID has been eliminated, a higher number of school districts are certifying as “qualified” . Although a majority of school districts have positive certification, it is not uncommon to see multiple districts with qualified status in each City of Culver City
School District Funding and County Office of Education Oversight

2 | Page

8334 Parus Way, Granite Bay, California 95746
Office (916) 652-7165 Fax (916) 652-7168 [email protected] county, especially in challengin g economic times. It is more uncommon to see districts with a negative certification.

AB 1200 was created in 1991 to ensure that local educational agencies throughout California are adequately prepared to meet their financial obligations. This concer n arose following the bankruptcy of the Richmond School District and th e fiscal collapse of a few other districts that were preparing to request emergency loans from the state. AB 1200 improved fiscal procedures, standards, and accountability at the local leve l and expanded the role of county offices of education (COEs) in monitoring school districts by mandating that COEs intervene under certain circumstances to ensure districts can meet th eir financial obligations. Under AB 1200, COEs conduct reviews, examinations, and audits of districts, and providing written notifications of the results, at least annually, on the fiscal solvency of the districts with disapproved budgets, qualified, or negative certifications, or districts facing fiscal uncertainty.

School districts must submit regular financial re ports to their respective COEs, including interim reports and annual audits. If a school district is identified as having financial difficulties, AB 1200 outlines intervention procedures. The county su perintendent has the authority to disapprove a school district’s budget, or authority to declare a district in jeopardy of being unable to meet its financial obligations through a “qualified” or “negative” certification at interim financial reporting periods or at any time during the year. Such ac tion results in various authorized forms of intervention on the part of the county office including assigning external consultants, requiring a district fiscal recovery plan, or even disallowing certain district expenditures.

AB 1200 also led to the creation of FCMAT, a st ate entity that provides fiscal oversight and assistance to COEs and school districts facing financial challenges. FCMAT offers support in areas such as budget development, financial reporting, and crisis management and are often assigned as a fiscal advisor to school districts financial crisis or distress.

Essentially, when a district has a qualified or negative certificatio n, the COE intervenes to help the district balance their budget and avoid a larger financial problem. Assigning a fiscal advisor or developing a fiscal recover plan can be a solid tool for school districts to balance their budget, especially when finding difficulty identifying budget cuts internally.

When School Districts Are Unable to Balance Their Budgets

The terms fiscal crisis and fiscal distress tend to be used interchangeably. But for clarity, fiscal distress is less serious and precedes fiscal crisis. Districts experiencing fiscal distress have many options for turnaround. More frequently fiscal distress is the result of short-term budget difficulties and can be resolved by aggressive budget balancing actions.

City of Culver City
School District Funding and County Office of Education Oversight

3 | Page

8334 Parus Way, Granite Bay, California 95746
Office (916) 652-7165 Fax (916) 652-7168 [email protected] Fiscal crisis is more severe, usually the result of prolonged imbalances between resources and spending, or unanticipated events, leading to cash flow shortages and the exhaustion of options to mitigate those shortages (e.g., temporary cash borrowing options).

In extreme situations, a school wi ll enter into receivership. This oc curs when a school district is facing bankruptcy and has to petition the stat e for an emergency loan in order to continue operations. In this situation, the school district is assigned an administrator, or trustee to oversee all operations and the governing board loses its power. The admini strator makes cuts to staff, programs, and services to bring the budget back to positive status.

Districts with financial difficulty follow a progre ssion from stability to distress to crisis. Most districts stop at mild to moderate distress and ta ke the necessary action to turn around, others progress to distress and crisis and require more intense intervention. Since 1991, only nine school districts have progressed from crisis to receivership.

Budget Status of Culver City USD

Culver City Unified School District has a “qualif ied” certification of their Second Interim Report due to the fact that they are projecting thei r ending fund balance to fall below the required minimum 3%. They are not projecting a negative fund balance. When looking at their multi-year budget projection, the District is projecting to continue to no t meet the minimum 3% reserve requirement, however, they are projecting an in creasing fund balance pe rcentage showing an improving fiscal situation.

With a qualified status, it is likely that the COE will recommend a fiscal recovery plan that identifies sufficient budget cuts to bring the ending fund bala nce back up to the minimum 3% reserve requirement. If the fiscal recovery plan is not sufficient, the COE will likely assign a fiscal advisor to assist the District in identifying the improvements to the budget to achieve a 3% minimum reserve. Although the County Superinte ndent does have “stay” and “rescind” power for districts in financial distress, this power is typically used when a county superintendent believe the board’s action might jeopardize the sc hool district’s financial stability. They do not typically intervene unless it is an extreme situat ion. It is not until a sc hool district takes an emergency state loan that the school board would lose control of district operations.

Options to Augment School District Funding

School district operations are generally funded by a combination of local property taxes, including ERAF funds, and state aid. On average, school districts receive approximately 35% of the property taxes generated within a jurisdiction plus state aid in an amount up to their calculated Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) entitlement amount. To augment operational revenues, school districts can seek voter approval for parcel ta x revenues. They can also lease out property and use lease revenues for ongoing operations.

City of Culver City
School District Funding and County Office of Education Oversight

4 | Page

8334 Parus Way, Granite Bay, California 95746
Office (916) 652-7165 Fax (916) 652-7168 [email protected]

Although the City of Santa Monica is quite generous in providing a share of sales tax and property transfer taxes as well as significant joint use funding to their local school district, this contribution from a city is quite unique. Approximately 20%-25% of the District’s unrestricted funding comes from the City of Santa Monica. I am not aware of another district in California that receives significant unrestricted funding from their local city. Some cities will provide funding for specific projects of interest, for example an arts or athl etic program. In Marin County, there are cities that provide limited funding for arts and music programs. This funding amounts to several hundred thousand per year. The City of Culver City provides funding more in line with other cities in California, contributing approximately $500,000 per year for crossing guards.

Generally speaking, a school district has its own independently elected governing board that sets policy separate from that of the city. School district boundaries al so do not typically align with city boundaries. As such, school districts typically obtain augmented funding independently from their own taxpayers.

Summary

The COE oversight for school districts is designed to prevent significant financial crisis by creating a mechanism for intervention when facing budget challenges. The initial intervention phase can benefit districts by providing an outside reco mmendation for budget cuts or other budgetary recommendations. Although Culver City Unifie d School District is facing some financial challenges, their financial picture is projected to improve and, with support from their COE, will likely achieve budgetary stability.

Further, it is uncommon for cities to provide substantial unrestricted operating funds to their local school districts. It is the expectation that each governing body will make local decisions on how to raise funds from their own constituents.

Table 6
General Fund Income Data - 2023-24
Unified School Districts
Total Other Other
State Aid ERAF(1) Other LCFF Sources Federal Revenue State Revenue Local Revenue Total Revenues ABC
Unrestricted 160,305,571 17,495,711 61,965,669 239,766,952 0 6,820,048 9,845,284 256,432,283 Restricted 0 0 0 0 29,216,271 52,404,671 8,064,994 89,685,936 Total 160,305,571 17,495,711 61,965,669 239,766,952 29,216,271 59,224,719 17,910,277 346,118,219 Percent 66.86% 7.30% 25.84% 69.27% 8.44% 17.11% 5.17% 100.00% Acton-Agua Dulce(2)
Unrestricted 11,233,303 608,323 1,596,446 13,438,072 0 240,358 3,822,815 17,501,245 Restricted 0 0 0 0 1,532,552 1,933,983 1,202,804 4,669,339 Total 11,233,303 608,323 1,596,446 13,438,072 1,532,552 2,174,341 5,025,619 22,170,585 Percent 83.59% 4.53% 11.88% 60.61% 6.91% 9.81% 22.67% 100.00% Alhambra
Unrestricted 127,069,037 12,755,689 61,067,660 200,892,386 0 6,363,446 6,463,413 213,719,245 Restricted 0 0 0 0 35,290,733 35,485,194 23,424,679 94,200,606 Total 127,069,037 12,755,689 61,067,660 200,892,386 35,290,733 41,848,640 29,888,092 307,919,851 Percent 63.25% 6.35% 30.40% 65.24% 11.46% 13.59% 9.71% 100.00% Arcadia
Unrestricted 43,436,461 6,215,586 55,683,265 105,335,313 0 3,128,261 3,659,148 112,122,721 Restricted 0 0 0 0 4,850,081 13,177,959 23,248,821 41,276,861 Total 43,436,461 6,215,586 55,683,265 105,335,313 4,850,081 16,306,220 26,907,969 153,399,583 Percent 41.24% 5.90% 52.86% 68.67% 3.16% 10.63% 17.54% 100.00% Azusa
Unrestricted 71,282,913 6,122,997 28,135,012 105,540,923 0 1,637,498 2,147,461 109,325,881 Restricted 0 0 0 0 23,127,239 17,773,868 8,594,803 49,495,911 Total 71,282,913 6,122,997 28,135,012 105,540,923 23,127,239 19,411,366 10,742,264 158,821,792 Percent 67.54% 5.80% 26.66% 66.45% 14.56% 12.22% 6.76% 100.00% Baldwin Park(2)
Unrestricted 130,835,234 10,437,362 26,685,722 167,958,318 0 4,920,381 9,089,062 181,967,761 Restricted 0 0 0 0 30,789,361 31,931,312 14,230,158 76,950,832 Total 130,835,234 10,437,362 26,685,722 167,958,318 30,789,361 36,851,693 23,319,220 258,918,592 Percent 77.90% 6.21% 15.89% 64.87% 11.89% 14.23% 9.01% 100.00% Bassett
Unrestricted 31,379,098 2,622,903 11,698,069 45,700,070 0 793,281 2,002,347 48,495,699 Restricted 0 0 0 0 12,474,141 11,431,406 2,965,615 26,871,162 Total 31,379,098 2,622,903 11,698,069 45,700,070 12,474,141 12,224,688 4,967,962 75,366,861 Percent 68.66% 5.74% 25.60% 60.64% 16.55% 16.22% 6.59% 100.00% District
Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Sources
Property Taxes
Source: SACS Web System
2023-24 Unaudited Actuals
76 Table 6
General Fund Income Data - 2023-24
Unified School Districts
Total Other Other
State Aid ERAF(1) Other LCFF Sources Federal Revenue State Revenue Local Revenue Total RevenuesDistrict Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Sources
Property Taxes
Bellflower
Unrestricted 105,675,994 9,505,328 34,409,609 149,590,931 1,999 3,990,473 6,089,649 159,673,052 Restricted 0 0 643,183 643,183 21,650,242 36,145,555 2,765,393 61,204,374 Total 105,675,994 9,505,328 35,052,792 150,234,114 21,652,242 40,136,028 8,855,042 220,877,426 Percent 70.34% 6.33% 23.33% 68.02% 9.80% 18.17% 4.01% 100.00% Beverly Hills
Unrestricted 1,338,649 0 68,774,184 70,112,833 0 819,876 15,558,071 86,490,780 Restricted 0 0 0 0 2,307,332 5,402,588 3,602,409 11,312,329 Total 1,338,649 0 68,774,184 70,112,833 2,307,332 6,222,464 19,160,480 97,803,108 Percent 1.91% 0.00% 98.09% 71.69% 2.36% 6.36% 19.59% 100.00% Bonita
Unrestricted 70,621,738 8,653,110 34,956,548 114,231,396 4,654 9,043,528 4,731,863 128,011,440 Restricted 0 0 0 0 7,478,438 7,915,363 13,153,681 28,547,482 Total 70,621,738 8,653,110 34,956,548 114,231,396 7,483,092 16,958,891 17,885,543 156,558,922 Percent 61.82% 7.58% 30.60% 72.96% 4.78% 10.83% 11.42% 100.00% Burbank
Unrestricted 74,544,396 11,293,636 83,613,729 169,451,761 0 6,764,260 4,024,242 180,240,263 Restricted 0 0 0 0 9,214,462 27,217,267 5,065,406 41,497,135 Total 74,544,396 11,293,636 83,613,729 169,451,761 9,214,462 33,981,528 9,089,648 221,737,398 Percent 43.99% 6.66% 49.34% 76.42% 4.16% 15.33% 4.10% 100.00% Charter Oak
Unrestricted 37,977,922 3,787,663 16,835,278 58,600,863 0 1,394,759 2,488,195 62,483,816 Restricted 0 0 0 0 3,081,129 12,069,182 6,804,588 21,954,899 Total 37,977,922 3,787,663 16,835,278 58,600,863 3,081,129 13,463,941 9,292,784 84,438,716 Percent 64.81% 6.46% 28.73% 69.40% 3.65% 15.95% 11.01% 100.00% Claremont
Unrestricted 46,363,683 5,810,008 24,554,481 76,728,173 10,858 2,314,957 2,579,426 81,633,414 Restricted 0 0 0 0 5,913,735 1,680,370 0 7,594,105
Total 46,363,683 5,810,008 24,554,481 76,728,173 5,924,593 3,995,327 2,579,426 89,227,519 Percent 60.43% 7.57% 32.00% 85.99% 6.64% 4.48% 2.89% 100.00% Compton(2)
Unrestricted 215,598,730 16,621,646 53,826,820 286,047,196 0 4,376,663 19,481,034 309,904,893 Restricted 0 0 0 0 92,112,854 73,946,856 11,577,599 177,637,308 Total 215,598,730 16,621,646 53,826,820 286,047,196 92,112,854 78,323,519 31,058,633 487,542,201 Percent 75.37% 5.81% 18.82% 58.67% 18.89% 16.06% 6.37% 100.00% Source: SACS Web System
2023-24 Unaudited Actuals
77 Table 6
General Fund Income Data - 2023-24
Unified School Districts
Total Other Other
State Aid ERAF(1) Other LCFF Sources Federal Revenue State Revenue Local Revenue Total RevenuesDistrict Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Sources
Property Taxes
Covina-Valley
Unrestricted 101,480,888 13,558,784 39,237,458 154,277,129 0 3,899,612 4,787,857 162,964,599 Restricted 0 0 0 0 25,226,747 39,976,574 7,801,310 73,004,631 Total 101,480,888 13,558,784 39,237,458 154,277,129 25,226,747 43,876,186 12,589,167 235,969,230 Percent 65.78% 8.79% 25.43% 65.38% 10.69% 18.59% 5.34% 100.00% Culver City
Unrestricted 32,949,349 5,209,392 42,287,040 80,445,781 0 2,137,191 9,432,547 92,015,519 Restricted 0 0 0 0 4,464,123 18,966,326 422,455 23,852,903 Total 32,949,349 5,209,392 42,287,040 80,445,781 4,464,123 21,103,516 9,855,003 115,868,423 Percent 40.96% 6.48% 52.57% 69.43% 3.85% 18.21% 8.51% 100.00% Downey
Unrestricted 213,525,266 20,238,833 65,908,638 299,672,737 0 5,846,132 7,263,652 312,782,520 Restricted 0 0 0 0 42,819,327 71,564,192 17,621,936 132,005,455 Total 213,525,266 20,238,833 65,908,638 299,672,737 42,819,327 77,410,323 24,885,588 444,787,975 Percent 71.25% 6.75% 21.99% 67.37% 9.63% 17.40% 5.59% 100.00% Duarte(2)
Unrestricted 29,351,167 2,541,003 7,450,686 39,342,856 0 1,513,238 2,926,157 43,782,251 Restricted 0 0 0 0 7,969,796 5,309,992 7,618,869 20,898,657 Total 29,351,167 2,541,003 7,450,686 39,342,856 7,969,796 6,823,230 10,545,026 64,680,908 Percent 74.60% 6.46% 18.94% 60.83% 12.32% 10.55% 16.30% 100.00% El Rancho
Unrestricted 79,685,310 7,030,250 23,051,887 109,767,446 460,815 2,299,572 4,734,676 117,262,509 Restricted 0 0 0 0 14,779,948 11,659,430 5,241,670 31,681,048 Total 79,685,310 7,030,250 23,051,887 109,767,446 15,240,763 13,959,002 9,976,346 148,943,557 Percent 72.59% 6.40% 21.00% 73.70% 10.23% 9.37% 6.70% 100.00% El Segundo
Unrestricted 20,777,668 2,977,890 15,319,403 39,074,961 0 929,421 5,041,079 45,045,460 Restricted 0 0 0 0 1,308,609 6,214,703 3,205,112 10,728,424 Total 20,777,668 2,977,890 15,319,403 39,074,961 1,308,609 7,144,125 8,246,190 55,773,884 Percent 53.17% 7.62% 39.21% 70.06% 2.35% 12.81% 14.79% 100.00% Glendale
Unrestricted 148,046,247 20,397,660 125,629,356 294,073,263 31,329 10,360,179 11,947,503 316,412,275 Restricted 0 0 0 0 26,515,364 67,114,671 10,927,420 104,557,456 Total 148,046,247 20,397,660 125,629,356 294,073,263 26,546,693 77,474,851 22,874,923 420,969,731 Percent 50.34% 6.94% 42.72% 69.86% 6.31% 18.40% 5.43% 100.00% Source: SACS Web System
2023-24 Unaudited Actuals
78 Table 6
General Fund Income Data - 2023-24
Unified School Districts
Total Other Other
State Aid ERAF(1) Other LCFF Sources Federal Revenue State Revenue Local Revenue Total RevenuesDistrict Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Sources
Property Taxes
Glendora
Unrestricted 36,671,575 6,002,402 36,907,168 79,581,145 0 2,247,379 3,408,575 85,237,099 Restricted 0 0 0 0 6,059,496 7,698,310 7,857,251 21,615,057 Total 36,671,575 6,002,402 36,907,168 79,581,145 6,059,496 9,945,690 11,265,826 106,852,157 Percent 46.08% 7.54% 46.38% 74.48% 5.67% 9.31% 10.54% 100.00% Hacienda La Puente
Unrestricted 161,616,570 14,996,786 47,689,029 224,302,385 0 4,262,816 10,701,116 239,266,317 Restricted 0 0 0 0 22,773,797 61,564,091 3,973,285 88,311,172 Total 161,616,570 14,996,786 47,689,029 224,302,385 22,773,797 65,826,907 14,674,400 327,577,489 Percent 72.05% 6.69% 21.26% 68.47% 6.95% 20.10% 4.48% 100.00% Inglewood(2)
Unrestricted 65,784,642 4,671,332 43,569,155 114,025,128 0 1,766,463 11,909,318 127,700,909 Restricted 0 0 0 0 34,707,645 29,135,327 7,915,354 71,758,326 Total 65,784,642 4,671,332 43,569,155 114,025,128 34,707,645 30,901,790 19,824,672 199,459,235 Percent 57.69% 4.10% 38.21% 57.17% 17.40% 15.49% 9.94% 100.00% La Canada
Unrestricted 16,188,963 2,827,548 24,827,812 43,844,323 6,205 1,101,973 11,493,314 56,445,814 Restricted 0 0 0 0 1,178,549 7,513,993 57,156 8,749,698 Total 16,188,963 2,827,548 24,827,812 43,844,323 1,184,754 8,615,965 11,550,470 65,195,512 Percent 36.92% 6.45% 56.63% 67.25% 1.82% 13.22% 17.72% 100.00% Las Virgenes
Unrestricted 45,173,937 8,030,668 62,686,967 115,891,572 0 3,250,075 12,935,499 132,077,145 Restricted 0 0 0 0 4,579,450 20,273,798 2,021,552 26,874,799 Total 45,173,937 8,030,668 62,686,967 115,891,572 4,579,450 23,523,872 14,957,050 158,951,944 Percent 38.98% 6.93% 54.09% 72.91% 2.88% 14.80% 9.41% 100.00% Long Beach(2)
Unrestricted 553,009,913 58,416,157 251,089,958 862,516,027 0 21,088,187 33,788,315 917,392,528 Restricted 0 0 0 0 207,719,937 195,828,775 16,744,160 420,292,871 Total 553,009,913 58,416,157 251,089,958 862,516,027 207,719,937 216,916,962 50,532,474 1,337,685,400 Percent 64.12% 6.77% 29.11% 64.48% 15.53% 16.22% 3.78% 100.00% Los Angeles(2)
Unrestricted 4,335,083,090 288,669,186 2,078,981,571 6,702,733,847 488,389,587 143,777,103 457,260,360 7,792,160,898 Restricted 0 0 32,742,901 32,742,901 1,618,181,526 1,634,577,164 124,851,913 3,410,353,504 Total 4,335,083,090 288,669,186 2,111,724,472 6,735,476,748 2,106,571,113 1,778,354,267 582,112,274 11,202,514,402 Percent 64.36% 4.29% 31.35% 60.12% 18.80% 15.87% 5.20% 100.00% Source: SACS Web System
2023-24 Unaudited Actuals
79 Table 6
General Fund Income Data - 2023-24
Unified School Districts
Total Other Other
State Aid ERAF(1) Other LCFF Sources Federal Revenue State Revenue Local Revenue Total RevenuesDistrict Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Sources
Property Taxes
Lynwood
Unrestricted 151,024,604 11,577,232 27,048,062 189,649,899 0 3,608,540 27,527,718 220,786,157 Restricted 0 0 0 0 33,746,567 50,387,126 (3,076,922) 81,056,771 Total 151,024,604 11,577,232 27,048,062 189,649,899 33,746,567 53,995,666 24,450,795 301,842,927 Percent 79.63% 6.10% 14.26% 62.83% 11.18% 17.89% 8.10% 100.00% Manhattan Beach
Unrestricted 9,312,223 3,077,176 54,823,682 67,213,080 0 1,746,756 7,663,971 76,623,806 Restricted 0 0 0 0 2,648,751 10,661,274 10,921,385 24,231,410 Total 9,312,223 3,077,176 54,823,682 67,213,080 2,648,751 12,408,030 18,585,355 100,855,216 Percent 13.85% 4.58% 81.57% 66.64% 2.63% 12.30% 18.43% 100.00% Monrovia
Unrestricted 35,780,353 4,253,996 23,139,272 63,173,621 0 1,747,416 2,309,125 67,230,163 Restricted 0 0 0 0 5,112,410 8,198,437 8,204,895 21,515,742 Total 35,780,353 4,253,996 23,139,272 63,173,621 5,112,410 9,945,853 10,514,020 88,745,905 Percent 56.64% 6.73% 36.63% 71.18% 5.76% 11.21% 11.85% 100.00% Montebello
Unrestricted 211,465,418 19,207,956 81,260,823 311,934,198 9,875,000 8,622,558 26,005,606 356,437,362 Restricted 0 0 0 0 49,394,150 55,698,390 28,886,227 133,978,767 Total 211,465,418 19,207,956 81,260,823 311,934,198 59,269,150 64,320,948 54,891,834 490,416,130 Percent 67.79% 6.16% 26.05% 63.61% 12.09% 13.12% 11.19% 100.00% Norwalk-La Mirada
Unrestricted 141,638,390 14,189,030 54,599,830 210,427,250 0 7,074,927 6,755,016 224,257,192 Restricted 0 0 0 0 27,692,253 49,342,937 4,929,592 81,964,783 Total 141,638,390 14,189,030 54,599,830 210,427,250 27,692,253 56,417,864 11,684,608 306,221,975 Percent 67.31% 6.74% 25.95% 68.72% 9.04% 18.42% 3.82% 100.00% Palos Verdes Peninsula
Unrestricted 45,649,242 7,114,062 65,579,125 118,342,429 377,928 3,181,066 25,952,850 147,854,273 Restricted 0 0 0 0 5,282,707 20,829,465 384,019 26,496,191 Total 45,649,242 7,114,062 65,579,125 118,342,429 5,660,635 24,010,531 26,336,870 174,350,464 Percent 38.57% 6.01% 55.41% 67.88% 3.25% 13.77% 15.11% 100.00% Paramount
Unrestricted 159,320,232 12,464,805 35,522,873 207,307,910 0 4,923,894 7,419,370 219,651,174 Restricted 0 0 0 0 28,439,895 38,293,471 15,546,190 82,279,556 Total 159,320,232 12,464,805 35,522,873 207,307,910 28,439,895 43,217,365 22,965,560 301,930,730 Percent 76.85% 6.01% 17.14% 68.66% 9.42% 14.31% 7.61% 100.00% Source: SACS Web System
2023-24 Unaudited Actuals
80 Table 6
General Fund Income Data - 2023-24
Unified School Districts
Total Other Other
State Aid ERAF(1) Other LCFF Sources Federal Revenue State Revenue Local Revenue Total RevenuesDistrict Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Sources
Property Taxes
Pasadena(2)
Unrestricted 87,448,015 8,408,699 103,834,396 199,691,109 48,086 4,706,916 21,912,559 226,358,671 Restricted 0 0 0 0 48,760,091 52,533,694 7,263,077 108,556,862 Total 87,448,015 8,408,699 103,834,396 199,691,109 48,808,177 57,240,611 29,175,636 334,915,533 Percent 43.79% 4.21% 52.00% 59.62% 14.57% 17.09% 8.71% 100.00% Pomona(2)
Unrestricted 236,986,469 19,101,208 56,616,071 312,703,748 0 4,909,689 17,209,910 334,823,346 Restricted 0 0 0 0 72,382,715 59,592,357 12,825,688 144,800,761 Total 236,986,469 19,101,208 56,616,071 312,703,748 72,382,715 64,502,046 30,035,598 479,624,107 Percent 75.79% 6.11% 18.11% 65.20% 15.09% 13.45% 6.26% 100.00% Redondo Beach
Unrestricted 38,854,692 6,775,514 64,092,520 109,722,727 90,207 3,281,963 3,222,318 116,317,214 Restricted 0 0 0 0 6,170,736 13,564,518 4,255,214 23,990,468 Total 38,854,692 6,775,514 64,092,520 109,722,727 6,260,943 16,846,481 7,477,532 140,307,682 Percent 35.41% 6.18% 58.41% 78.20% 4.46% 12.01% 5.33% 100.00% Rowland(2)
Unrestricted 125,711,502 10,291,079 41,930,675 177,933,256 0 4,036,271 6,227,156 188,196,684 Restricted 0 0 0 0 24,467,952 43,917,385 4,924,835 73,310,172 Total 125,711,502 10,291,079 41,930,675 177,933,256 24,467,952 47,953,656 11,151,992 261,506,856 Percent 70.65% 5.78% 23.57% 68.04% 9.36% 18.34% 4.26% 100.00% San Gabriel(2)
Unrestricted 39,914,012 3,983,652 19,365,277 63,262,941 0 2,134,129 1,354,532 66,751,602 Restricted 0 0 0 0 6,721,034 9,166,884 7,588,187 23,476,106 Total 39,914,012 3,983,652 19,365,277 63,262,941 6,721,034 11,301,014 8,942,719 90,227,708 Percent 63.09% 6.30% 30.61% 70.11% 7.45% 12.52% 9.91% 100.00% San Marino
Unrestricted 12,592,742 2,029,666 18,389,044 33,011,452 0 865,034 9,404,120 43,280,606 Restricted 0 0 0 0 1,367,347 2,280,238 7,276,241 10,923,826 Total 12,592,742 2,029,666 18,389,044 33,011,452 1,367,347 3,145,273 16,680,360 54,204,432 Percent 38.15% 6.15% 55.71% 60.90% 2.52% 5.80% 30.77% 100.00% Santa Monica-Malibu
Unrestricted 8,585,849 0 118,910,150 127,495,999 0 2,565,172 62,693,793 192,754,964 Restricted 0 0 0 0 5,465,309 2,757,892 14,359,882 22,583,083 Total 8,585,849 0 118,910,150 127,495,999 5,465,309 5,323,064 77,053,675 215,338,048 Percent 6.73% 0.00% 93.27% 59.21% 2.54% 2.47% 35.78% 100.00% Source: SACS Web System
2023-24 Unaudited Actuals
81 Table 6
General Fund Income Data - 2023-24
Unified School Districts
Total Other Other
State Aid ERAF(1) Other LCFF Sources Federal Revenue State Revenue Local Revenue Total RevenuesDistrict Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Sources
Property Taxes
South Pasadena
Unrestricted 32,318,778 4,177,066 17,158,855 53,654,699 0 1,674,131 3,720,170 59,049,000 Restricted 0 0 0 0 2,846,279 5,700,082 6,380,476 14,926,837 Total 32,318,778 4,177,066 17,158,855 53,654,699 2,846,279 7,374,212 10,100,646 73,975,837 Percent 60.23% 7.79% 31.98% 72.53% 3.85% 9.97% 13.65% 100.00% Temple City
Unrestricted 39,742,770 4,772,503 20,115,959 64,631,232 0 1,574,412 880,856 67,086,500 Restricted 0 0 0 0 4,271,929 11,359,526 7,791,950 23,423,406 Total 39,742,770 4,772,503 20,115,959 64,631,232 4,271,929 12,933,938 8,672,806 90,509,905 Percent 61.49% 7.38% 31.12% 71.41% 4.72% 14.29% 9.58% 100.00% Torrance
Unrestricted 130,991,898 17,980,801 110,544,179 259,516,878 118,234 8,177,469 12,363,047 280,175,627 Restricted 0 0 0 0 12,881,500 39,648,825 8,071,868 60,602,194 Total 130,991,898 17,980,801 110,544,179 259,516,878 12,999,734 47,826,294 20,434,915 340,777,821 Percent 50.48% 6.93% 42.60% 76.15% 3.81% 14.03% 6.00% 100.00% Walnut Valley
Unrestricted 98,449,221 12,339,793 50,378,855 161,167,869 0 4,546,812 5,839,028 171,553,709 Restricted 0 0 0 0 7,164,694 17,248,794 19,777,346 44,190,833 Total 98,449,221 12,339,793 50,378,855 161,167,869 7,164,694 21,795,606 25,616,374 215,744,543 Percent 61.08% 7.66% 31.26% 74.70% 3.32% 10.10% 11.87% 100.00% West Covina(2)
Unrestricted 84,895,043 7,444,865 19,376,297 111,716,205 81,360 3,346,932 9,255,485 124,399,983 Restricted 0 0 0 0 7,658,129 17,157,396 12,487,001 37,302,526 Total 84,895,043 7,444,865 19,376,297 111,716,205 7,739,489 20,504,328 21,742,487 161,702,509 Percent 75.99% 6.66% 17.34% 69.09% 4.79% 12.68% 13.45% 100.00% Wiseburn(2)
Unrestricted 12,663,355 1,490,424 13,613,571 27,767,350 0 628,006 3,730,408 32,125,764 Restricted 0 0 0 0 1,328,528 6,230,087 1,663,390 9,222,006 Total 12,663,355 1,490,424 13,613,571 27,767,350 1,328,528 6,858,093 5,393,799 41,347,770 Percent 45.61% 5.37% 49.03% 67.16% 3.21% 16.59% 13.04% 100.00% Source: SACS Web System
2023-24 Unaudited Actuals
82 Table 6
General Fund Income Data - 2023-24
Unified School Districts
Total Other Other
State Aid ERAF(1) Other LCFF Sources Federal Revenue State Revenue Local Revenue Total RevenuesDistrict Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Sources
Property Taxes

TOTAL UNIFIED
Unrestricted 8,670,352,122 738,177,380 4,424,738,136 13,833,267,639 499,496,262 330,439,223 941,059,016 15,604,262,133 Restricted 0 0 33,386,084 33,386,084 2,651,125,860 3,020,481,698 521,420,934 6,226,414,580 Total 8,670,352,122 738,177,380 4,458,124,220 13,866,653,723 3,150,622,122 3,350,920,921 1,462,479,950 21,830,676,713 Percent 62.53% 5.32% 32.15% 63.52% 14.43% 15.35% 6.70% 100.00%

TOTAL EXCLUDING
L.A. UNIFIED
Unrestricted 4,335,269,032 449,508,194 2,345,756,565 7,130,533,792 11,106,675 186,662,120 483,798,656 7,812,101,235 Restricted 0 0 643,183 643,183 1,032,944,334 1,385,904,534 396,569,021 2,816,061,076 Total 4,335,269,032 449,508,194 2,346,399,748 7,131,176,975 1,044,051,009 1,572,566,654 880,367,677 10,628,162,311 Percent 60.79% 6.30% 32.90% 67.10% 9.82% 14.80% 8.28% 100.00% (1) ERAF: Education Revenue Augmentation Fund.
(2) These districts may have charter school data included in their General Fund, although charter school ADA is excluded from the districts' LCFF revenue calculation ADA.

Source: SACS Web System
2023-24 Unaudited Actuals
83 FY24-25 FY24-25 FY24-25 FY25-26 FY25-26
Adopted Revised Estimated Estimated Adopted
PROJ PROJECT TITLE Budget Budget Spend Carryover Budget PB027 Traffic Calming Upgrades 146,000 146,000 125,500 20,500 - 20,500 May 12, 2025 Staff Report to award contract for Signalized Intersection Improvements allocated $120,000 from this CIP PE005 Vets Memorial HVAC Replc/Decarb - 233,811 43,396 147,020 - Remaining funds required for repayment of County loan for HVAC replacement project
PE007 Council Chambers Audio/Visual - 700,000 628,962 71,038 - The Audio/visual upgrades have been completed. The remaining funds are for the maintenance of new system included in the executed agreement.

PF022 VMC/Sr. Center Microgrid - 53,745 - 53,745 - 53,745 53,745 This project has been cancelled.

PF025 Bicycle/Ped. Action Plan Implement 50,000 450,000 - 450,000 - 450,000 450,000 Staff is currently working with a consultant on the design for Culver Blvd Bike Facilities using Measure M local return. CIP PF025 funding was intended for the construction phase of the project along with $250K from Fund 437 Traffic Mobility Fund allocated as part of the FY 26 Budget. This could potentially be funded from Fund 437 Mobility Improvement Fund.

PF027 PD Forensic Lab Rehab/Update - 6,777 6,777 - 6,777 6,777 This project has been completed.

PF034 Emergency Shelter&Transitional Hsg - 358,839 131,210 227,628 - Remaining funds are necessary to close out the project grant requirements
PF035 Permanent Housing - Sunburst - - 89,966 (89,966) - PF036 Public Works/Engineering Office - - 984 - - This project has been completed.

PF037 CCAD BID Improvement - 71,200 43,600 27,600 - 17,600 This funding has been used to support the Arts District through street maintenance, street sweeping and lighting projects. The City is planning to spend $10,000 on signs in FY 26.

PF040 Police Stn PA/Intercom/Radio System - 300,000 50,000 250,000 - 225,000 225,000 Staff has completed phase 1 one of the proposed work. Phase 2 is estimated to be $25,000. The remaining $225,000 is intended to replacement end of life equipment in future years.

PF046 405 Freeway Underpass at Culver Blv 92,300 92,300 - 92,300 - 92,300 92,300 The project is intended to revitalize the spaces where encampments were present. During preliminary design it was determined that Caltrans needs to approve any City plans. Staff could look into Caltrans' grant opporunties.

PF047 405 Freeway Underpass at Venice Blv 86,000 86,000 - 86,000 - 86,000 86,000 The project is intended to revitalize the spaces where encampments were present. During preliminary design it was determined that Caltrans needs to approve any City plans. Staff could look into Caltrans' grant opporunties.

PF049 Lenawee Ave Storm Drain Rehabilitation 350,000 350,000 49,290 300,710 - Staff worked with a consultant on the design phase and is preparing to take an item to City Council to approve the final plans and specifications for bidding.

PF050 Ballona Creek Bicycle - 200,000 - 200,000 - 200,000 200,000 Staff took an item to Council as part of the August 11 agenda to award an agreement for feasbility study not to exceed $200,000. This could potentially be funded from Fund 437 Mobility Improvement Fund.
420 - GENERAL FUND NON-RESERVES
Current Project Status Recom for
Defund
Potential
Funding
Recom for
Fund 437
Attachment 2
FY24-25 FY24-25 FY24-25 FY25-26 FY25-26
Adopted Revised Estimated Estimated Adopted
PROJ PROJECT TITLE Budget Budget Spend Carryover Budget Current Project Status Recom for
Defund
Potential
Funding
Recom for
Fund 437
PL010 Matteson/Sawtelle Traffic Improve. - 279,847 - 35,803 - This project is partially funded with mitigation fees PL014 Traffic Signal Battery Backup Systm 150,000 150,000 148,991 1,009 - The funds are encumbered in PO with Econolite.

PO008 Rancho Higuera NTMP - 89,444 - 89,444 This project is partially funded with mitigation fees.

PO012 5-Year Update to Hazard Mitigation - 80,358 4,390 75,968 - 75,968 75,968 This project has been completed. Council accepted the Mitigation Plan in August 2024.

PO016 Arts District Corridor 80,000 80,000 80,000 - 80,000 This project is for the removal of tree surrounds in the Arts District corridor. Staff is gathering community feedback on the tree surround to bring to Cultural Affairs Commission and City Council. No funds have been spent to date.

PO017 Arts District Median Replanting 300,000 300,000 - 300,000 - 300,000 300,000 Staff is currently working to design this project in-house. The funds are intended for construction.

PO018 CCAD Allocation for Lighting 70,000 70,000 70,000 - - PP009 Sports Field Renovations - 28,413 2,113 26,300 - 26,300 This funding was intended to fix the infield at Bill Botts field.

PP012 Retractable Bollard Install -CC Prk - - - - - PP013 Culver City Park Fields - 827,371 - 827,371 - 827,371 This project is intended to fix the ball fields at the top of Culver Park.

This project is connected to CIP PP022 and the projects (and the project funding) is intended to be combined to fund construction.

Staff has been working to schedule construction to minimize disruption to AYSO and Little League.

PP018 Culver City Plunge Backup Pool Heater - 130,000 109,905 20,095 - 20,095 20,095 This project has been completed.

PP019 Parks Feasibility Study - - - - - PP020 Sr Center Outdoor Patio Remodel - 160,000 - 160,000 - 160,000 Staff has been working on the design in-house and is preparing to take an item to City Council soon.

PP023 Parks Master Plan - 393,884 370,071 23,813 - 23,813 23,813 This project has been completed.

PS001 Concrete Street Rehabilitation 200,000 369,800 153,000 216,800 - 216,800 This project is intended to address ongoing concrete street rehabilition work.

PS014 Jackson Ave. Pedestrian Walkway - 254,759 253,102 1,657 - 1,657 1,657 The design contract has been closed.

PS016 Congestion Relief Project - 196,947 - 196,947 - This project is partially funded with mitigation fees.

PS018 Ballona Crk Bike/Ped Path Safety Enhancemnts - 230,000 74,588 155,412 - The City has received a grant for this projet. The funding is likely required matching funds. Staff is currently working with a consultant on the final design and permiting process.

PS019 Overland/Ranch/Kelmore-Redesign QB - - 6,915 - - PS022 Galvin Street Parkway Expansion - 8,357 217 8,140 - 8,140 PS025 Arts District Parking Study - 150,000 - 150,000 - 150,000 150,000 This project was originally allocated funding in FY 23. No funds have been spent to date.

PS029 Overland-Playa Ped/Bicycle Imp 250,000 250,000 - 250,000 - 250,000 250,000 Staff is currently working with a consultant on the design. This funding was intended to be used for construction along with $750K from Fund 437 Traffic Mobility Fund allocated as part of the FY 26 Budget. This funding could be replaced with additional funds from Fund 437 Mobility Improvement Fund.

PS033 Culver Blvd Realignmt- CleanupPZ460 - 50,000 32,227 17,773 - This project is partially funded with mitigation fees.

FY24-25 FY24-25 FY24-25 FY25-26 FY25-26
Adopted Revised Estimated Estimated Adopted
PROJ PROJECT TITLE Budget Budget Spend Carryover Budget Current Project Status Recom for
Defund
Potential
Funding
Recom for
Fund 437
PS036 New Higuera Street Sidewalk 135,000 135,000 10,620 124,380 - 124,380 Staff took an item to Council as part of the August 11 agenda to award a construction contract.

PS037 Ocean Drive Sidewalk – Overland Ave 225,000 225,000 19,670 205,330 - 205,330 Staff is currently working with a consultant on the design.

PS038 Concrete Slurry Seal 12654 Washingt 45,140 45,140 45,140 - - Project can be closed out.

PT001 Wireless Deployment-City Facilities - 79,024 9,038 69,986 - 20,000 Staff intends to use at least $50,000 of the remaining funding for necessary network security infrasture upgrades
PT007 Citywide Electronic Doc. Mgt. Sys. 25,000 53,543 29,150 24,392 - The remaining funds are needed to pay for ongoing project implementation and maintenance.

PT010 Technology 250,000 306,668 83,518 223,150 - 100,000 Staff is currently working on implementing Phase 1. Staff was planning to use the remaining $100,000 for Phase 2 at other City facilities (fire station 2, Senior Center, EOC, Vets)
PT012 Public Safety Camera Replacement - 72,587 72,587 - - PT015 Timekeeping Replacement Project 250,000 250,000 101,600 148,400 - A contract for a new timekeeping system has been awarded. Staff is working with the vendor to begin implementation. Remaining funds are needed to complete the project implementation
PZ295 Citywide Alley Pavement 350,000 351,230 - 351,230 - 350,000 350,000 This funding was allocated in FY 24-25 to provide the City contribution to a potential AD or CFD funded project. No AD or CFD has been established.

PZ388 Technology Replacement Fund 315,000 475,815 133,721 342,094 - 100,000 Staff has been replacing laptops to prepare for Windows 11. Staff may be able to save $100,000 from this effort but was contemplating using the savings to buy VMWare hardware because the licensing costs have tripled in the last 1.5 years
PZ428 Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk Replacement - 622,171 543,252 78,919 - 78,919 PZ429 Traffic Signal Replace/Upgrade 250,000 656,431 617,431 39,000 - This project is partially funded with mitigation fees.

PZ497 Stormwater Discharge Program/NPDES - 13,850 - 13,850 - 13,850 The City has on-going NPDES commitments requiring misc expenses.

PZ553 Higuera Street Bridge Replacement - 66,243 66,243 - - PZ554 Minor Pavement & Concrete Improve 150,000
279,998 - 279,998 - This project is partially funded with mitigation fees.

PZ594 Fencing Replacement at Parks - 35,000 - 35,000 - 35,000 Project has not started.

PZ599 Neighborhood Traffic Mgmt Program - 113,046 - 113,046 - This project is partially funded with mitigation fees.

PZ612 Upgrade Park Irrigation Systems - 58,686 15,418 43,268 - 43,268 This project is ongoing. It is intended to implement irrigation upgrades to reduce water consumption.

PZ614 Performing Arts - 30,000 30,000 - - PZ636 Finance System Replacement - 367,510 62,706 304,804 - 150,000 The City purchased its financial system ERP in 2012. This project is intended to fund necessary and ongoing upgrades to replace and improve outdated modules.

PZ638 Median Island Rehabilitation 36,159 86,366 72,607 13,759 - Currently in construction.

PZ684 Street Light Upgrades - 94,524 - 94,524 - This project is partially funded with mitigation fees.

PZ754 Ficus Tree Replacement 40,000 40,000 - 40,000 - 40,000 40,000 Funds allocated in FY 25. No funds spent to date.

PZ811 Citywide Speed Zone Study - 188,002 171,316 16,686 - 16,686 The City is required to conduct periodic speed zone surveys.

PZ826 Citywide Traffic Counts - 1,434 1,434 - - FY24-25 FY24-25 FY24-25 FY25-26 FY25-26
Adopted Revised Estimated Estimated Adopted
PROJ PROJECT TITLE Budget Budget Spend Carryover Budget Current Project Status Recom for
Defund
Potential
Funding
Recom for
Fund 437
PZ830 Skateboard Park Office - 200,000 - 200,000 - 200,000 Project has not started.

PZ899 Park Facilities Improvements - 33,192 - 33,192 - 33,192 Project has not started.

PZ902 Public Safety CAD/RMS/Mobile Units - 190,293 121,816 68,476 - The City is required to maintain its communication dispatch infrastructure as part of its agreement South Bay Regional Public Communications.

PZ923 Fox Hills Parking Supply Augment 250,000 250,000 67,098 182,902 - 182,902 182,902 Staff is currently working with a consultant on the design. This funding was intended to be used for construction along with $75K from Fund 437 Traffic Mobility Fund allocated as part of the FY 26 Budget. This funding could be replaced with additional funds from Fund 437 Mobility Improvement Fund.

PZ938 Citywide Bridge Repairs 200,000 321,431 22,862 298,569 - Currently in design. This is a federally funded project. Available funds could be needed for local match.

PZ941 Safe Routes to School 100,000 406,111 36,952 369,159 - 83,959 On July 14, 2025, Council approved an agreement for a Tri-School Traffic Study with a NTE of $285,200.
420 - GENERAL FUND NON-RESERVES Total 4,395,599 13,196,146 4,722,605 8,194,000 - 5,069,552 1,425,354 1,082,902 PA008 Veterans Park Parking Lot Resurfacing 100,000 100,000 - 100,000 450,000 The project has not started yet.

PE002 Radio System Replacement 327,210 784,393 462,284 324,790 561,000 This project is intended to fund the continued replacement of the Fire Department's radio system. On July 14, 2025 Council authorized a purchase order in the amount of $534,529 to purchase portable radios.

PF013 Fire Station Renovations 275,000 597,184 91,516 505,669 225,000 In January 2025, Council approved the plans and specifications for bidding. Staff took an item to Council as part of the August 11 agenda to award a construction contract in an amount not-to-exceed $366,687
PF020 PD Locker Rooms/Restrooms Rehab 200,000 743,013 40,925 702,089 - In August 2023, Council approved the plans and specifications for bidding. The Project is currently out to bid. Bids are due August 21, 2025
PF028 Parks Building Renovations 200,000 400,000 - 400,000 100,000 This is an ongoing annual project that provides funding for minor maintenance repairs and upgrades to the City's Parks and Recreation Facilities on an as-needed basis
PF029 Ivy Substation Building Improvement 50,000 768,086 6,146 761,940 - In May 2025, Council approved the plans and specifications for bidding. Bids were due on July 31, 2025. Staff is reviewing bids and preparing to take a item to Council to award an agreement for roof replacement.

PF039 Police Stn Bldg Imp/Pntg & Window 450,000 714,053 513,243 200,810 125,000 The window replacement and exterior painting has been completed.

Phase 2 of the project to paint the interior has not started yet.

PF041 PW City Yard HVAC Replacement 150,000 300,000 300,000 - 350,000 The City has entered into an agreement with a contractor for this project. Construction is currently underway.
420F - GENERAL FUND FACILITY PLANNING RESERVES
FY24-25 FY24-25 FY24-25 FY25-26 FY25-26
Adopted Revised Estimated Estimated Adopted
PROJ PROJECT TITLE Budget Budget Spend Carryover Budget Current Project Status Recom for
Defund
Potential
Funding
Recom for
Fund 437
PF042 City Hall/PD Elevator Upgrades 150,000 350,000 - 350,000 150,000 This project is intended to upgrade the elevators at City Hall. The project is in preliminary design.

PF048 City Hall Second Floor Lobby Area Security 132,500 132,500 - 132,500 - This project is intended to enhance security for the City Hall 2nd floor lobby area. Staff took an item to Council as part of the August 11 agenda to approve an agreement for design.

PF051 Police Station Flooring - - - - 600,000 This project is intended to replace the flooring in the Police Station.

The project is in design in-house.

PP011 Plunge Vessel Resurfacing 200,000 410,188 - 410,188 200,000 The project is intended to resurface the City's pool and pool deck. The project is in preliminary design.

PP014 Park Playground Rehabilitation 600,000 998,878 205,425 793,453 - This project is an ongoing project to rehabilitate the City's parks in rotation.

PP017 Blanco Park Bldg/Trailer Replacement 150,000 300,000 - 300,000 150,000 This project is intended to replace the Blanco Park Building/Trailer which currently requires repairs beyond what can be accomplished with annual maintenance of the facility. The project is in preliminary design.

PP024 Media Park/Lighting Furniture 80,000 80,000 68,887 11,113 - Project is currently underway.

PP028 Sound Proofing of Tennis Courts 150,000 150,000 49,643 100,357 - Soundproof fencing has been installed at Elenda Courts.

PZ132 Building Repairs 750,000 2,899,647 1,095,342 1,804,305 840,000 This project encompasses many of the City's ongoing building repair projects including but not limited to HVAC upgrades for City server room, elevator repairs, fence maintenance, terminate abatement, security system upgrades, maintenance and repairs, HR & Finance Office Conversion, Senior Center Flooring and Kitchen Appliance Replacement, Police Station Roof Replacement, City Hall Upgrade Siemens Fire
PZ844 UST Upgrades on City Property 450,000 467,686 17,547 450,139 - This project is intended to upgrade underground storage tanks. The project is in preliminary design.

PZ876 Vet's Memorial Bldg Refurbish 150,000 167,537 - 167,537 150,000 This project is intended to address needed upgrades to the building.

The project is in preliminary design.
420F - GEN. FUND FAC. PLAN. RESERVES Total 4,564,710 10,363,167 2,850,959 7,514,890 3,901,000 PP008 Lindberg Park Improvement Project - - - - 300,000 New project funded in FY 26 intended to replace the playground. The money is intended to cover design costs, and construction documents with the new playground being installed in FY 27. Design work has not started.

PP010 Upgrade Vet's Ball Field Lighting 150,000 250,000 - 250,000 600,000 The City has issued a Request for Proposals to replace the ball field lighting. Proposals are due August 7. Staff is preparing to take an item to Council in September to award an agreement.

PP022 Assessment of CC Park Hillside Slope 30,000 400,000 33,732 366,268 - The City is currently working with a consultant on the design. This project is connected to CIP PP013 and the project funding is intended to be combined to fund construction.

PP027 New Park Signage in all Parks 36,000 36,000 - 36,000 - Staff has been working on the sign design in-house and is preparing to place a sign order.

FY24-25 FY24-25 FY24-25 FY25-26 FY25-26
Adopted Revised Estimated Estimated Adopted
PROJ PROJECT TITLE Budget Budget Spend Carryover Budget Current Project Status Recom for
Defund
Potential
Funding
Recom for
Fund 437
PP029 Tellefson Park Remodel - - - - 210,000 New project funded in FY 26. This project was identified in the Parks Plan and requested by the PRCS Commission. This funding is for design and producing construction documents.

PZ640 Resurface/Restripe Sports Courts 250,000 259,956 - 259,956 - Staff is currently preparing to release a request for proposals for this project.
420R - GEN. FUND FAC. PLAN. RESERVES Total 466,000 945,956 33,732 912,224 1,110,000