TDC Runs A deficit - To Many Blue Signs ?

[scooterbug44]

So they're not just imprudently spending (and paying way too much for most things IMO), they're racking up megadebt!!!

Am I the only one who operates with a positive cash flow?

 

[NotDeadYet]

So what is the plan to pay for the next renourishment, which I believe is going to be more miles and more money, no?

 

[BeachSiO2]

So what is the plan to pay for the next renourishment, which I believe is going to be more miles and more money, no?

Here's the website that is updated monthly and will tell you all about it ;-)

http://protectwaltoncountybeaches.com/Future_Initiatives.asp

 

[RebelRider]

From the 2003-2004-2005-2006 & 2007 CAFR's

Bedtax Collected By Year

2003 - $5,760,032
2004 - $7,569,231 - adjusted to remove 4th cent - $5,676,292
2005 - $8,730,480 - adjusted to remove 4th cent - $6,277,860
2006 - $9,490,409 - adjusted to remove 4th cent - $7,117,806
2007 - $10,675,183 - adjusted to remove 4th cent - $8,006,387

These collections should also be adjusted to consider the rise in rental rates during the same period.

Revenues are up I agree, but when adjusted for pertainant data they are minimal.

 

[BeachSiO2]

From the 2003-2004-2005-2006 & 2007 CAFR's

Bedtax Collected By Year

2003 - $5,760,032
2004 - $7,569,231 - adjusted to remove 4th cent - $5,676,292
2005 - $8,730,480 - adjusted to remove 4th cent - $6,277,860
2006 - $9,490,409 - adjusted to remove 4th cent - $7,117,806
2007 - $10,675,183 - adjusted to remove 4th cent - $8,006,387

These collections should also be adjusted to consider the rise in rental rates during the same period.

Revenues are up I agree, but when adjusted for pertainant data they are minimal.

I don't understand your pertinent data comment but it looks like you had the data and still miscalculated, and I am quoting,

"Spending has sharply risen in the past few years while the Bed Tax collections have declined when you factor out the 25% rise in the bedtax revenue since 2004. They raised the tax rate from 3% to 4% in 2004.

To "clarify" your statement, Bed tax collections have increased over 29.1% since 2004 when you factor out the 25% rise in the bed tax revenue.

 

[RebelRider]

My pertinant data comment would be those adjustments due to COLA and inflation ie "real dollars".

They have had a increase. Sorry for the "honest mistake".

My original post:
The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Walton County Florida section shows that the TDC ran a $4,241,463 dollar deficit last year.

Folks that is

4 million dollars

 

[BeachSiO2]

My pertinant data comment would be those adjustments due to COLA and inflation ie "real dollars".

They have had a increase. Sorry for the "honest mistake".

I will edit my post accordingly but I hope you see how quickly the thread devolved into a multitude of accusations after your first few posts. Hopefully, through my follow-up posts people will see that this isn't as unusual as it appears. There are other capital projects that are constructed through outside financing in government. This is an example of one and here's a little more history on why this was the prefered method.

In 1999/2000, the BCC voted to set aside a 1% addition to the TDC tax for beach nourishment projects. Although the bed tax had been secured and reserved for beach nourishment projects since that time, there was still not enough funds available in the reserves in 2006/07 when the project was constructed. So if it was to be built then the County could either use general revenues (property taxes paid by everyone), create a special assessment taxing district, or pledge the 1% beach nourishment bed tax revenue stream for 10 years and get a loan. Since the principal+interest payment would equal about 1/2 of that 1% that was dedicated to beach nourishment, the BCC decided to do what is described above and lead to more money coming in than going out (i.e. a deficit).

 

[RebelRider]

I believe in the accounting world a defict would be described as an excess of expenses over revenues.

You statement below would describe a surplus - something the TDC has not had in two years straight:

2006 Deficit = $6,464,326
2007 Deficit = $4,241,463

Was the deficit due to beach renourishment? Yes
Is it still a deficit ? Yes


Since the principal+interest payment would equal about 1/2 of that 1% that was dedicated to beach nourishment, the BCC decided to do what is described above and lead to more money coming in than going out (i.e. a deficit).

 

[BeachSiO2]

I believe in the accounting world a defict would be described as an excess of expenses over revenues.

You statement below would describe a surplus - something the TDC has not had in two years straight:

2006 Deficit = $6,464,326
2007 Deficit = $4,241,463

Was the deficit due to beach renourishment? Yes
Is it still a deficit ? Yes


Since the principal+interest payment would equal about 1/2 of that 1% that was dedicated to beach nourishment, the BCC decided to do what is described above and lead to more money coming in than going out (i.e. a deficit).

Once again you are choosing the numbers to fit your needs but not to address the reality of the situation. Thus I am starting to wonder if the earlier was an honest mistake.;-)

Here it is as simply as I can put it. A beach restoration project totaling more than 23 million dollars was constructed during that period. Additionally, some funds were expended for Hurricane Dennis repairs during that same time period. These costs were more than the annual revenue generated through the bed tax collections and thus a deficit.

The deficit was offset with existing beach nourishment reserves, a state grant, FEMA reimbursements, AND a loan secured by the BCC for the beach nourishment project pledged against future bed tax revenues. That loan was for $10 million dollars. So my point is that there was no financial malfeasance as implied by your posts. As for the future payoffs, the debt service has been budgeted through the beach nourishment TDC tax this year, just like it was last year and will be for 8 more years.

 

[Smiling JOe]

makes sense to me. I'll add, if it hadn't been for the TDC rebuilding the walkovers after Hurr. Dennis and other storms, many tourists wouldn't have been filling the rooms around here, and thus wouldn't have been putting money back into the TDC coffers. Rebuilding walkovers, or buying the removable walkovers is money used which serves the public, and can be justified. Looking into alternative, removable walkovers, like being used at WaterCooler, is also a good idea, as a way to save much money in reconstruction costs.