In part due to an unexpected state reimbursement, Foster City now projects a $5.4 surplus this fiscal year — which ends in June — despite an expected deficit from earlier estimates.
Back in June, when the city adopted its initial 2025-26 budget, the city planned for a $3.8 million shortfall and a continued structural deficit over at least the next five years. Much of the shortfall was because the city opted not to include in its budget about $2 million worth of revenue that was supposed to be a state reimbursement.
The reimbursement owed to Foster City, in addition to most cities countywide, is related to vehicle license fees paid by residents, which are directed to the state and then subsequently reimbursed to cities, typically by the following fiscal year. But the payback process is not straightforward. Instead of simply giving cities and counties back the amount of fee revenue collected in their respective jurisdictions, the state uses a complicated reimbursement formula associated with the types and amount of school districts in its area. With the state facing its own budget challenges, the VLF inclusion for the county has remained in flux.
However, the city has received some of its payment from the state recently.
“We assumed there would be no shortfall reimbursement from the state. Ultimately, at the last minute there was a partial reimbursement of roughly two-thirds of the shortfall to the tune of $1.5 million,” Finance Director Nate Cruz said, adding that the state still owes the city $750,000 for the remainder.
Other revenue sources were on track, Cruz added, including the $42,000 worth of property tax received in this fiscal year’s first quarter.
“We only received $42,000 in the first three months, and that’s totally normal. Property tax only comes in the second and fourth quarter, so every city in California has very little property tax in the fourth quarter,” Cruz said.
Folks, more reason to vote NO on any upcoming tax proposals looking to take more of your hard-earned money to be squandered by Foster City’s so-called leaders. Speaking of squandered, take a gander at today’s article (https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/foster-city-rec-center-passes-halfway-mark/article_8d8fb08e-43ab-4afb-b459-77174bb3e494.html) on the new recreation center which, according to the article, councilmembers continued to move forward on even though there were fiscal concerns. I guess we know where some of that $5.4M surplus is going.
But don’t worry. I’m sure Foster City will float another bond measure or other financing mechanism for you to pay into in the future after they blow this $5.4M surplus. Why do I imagine unions are going to request another substantial raise so they get a piece of the surplus? Again vote NO on any financing mechanisms.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(1) comment
Folks, more reason to vote NO on any upcoming tax proposals looking to take more of your hard-earned money to be squandered by Foster City’s so-called leaders. Speaking of squandered, take a gander at today’s article (https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/foster-city-rec-center-passes-halfway-mark/article_8d8fb08e-43ab-4afb-b459-77174bb3e494.html) on the new recreation center which, according to the article, councilmembers continued to move forward on even though there were fiscal concerns. I guess we know where some of that $5.4M surplus is going.
But don’t worry. I’m sure Foster City will float another bond measure or other financing mechanism for you to pay into in the future after they blow this $5.4M surplus. Why do I imagine unions are going to request another substantial raise so they get a piece of the surplus? Again vote NO on any financing mechanisms.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.