Informational Memo Management Services - Memo No. 26-019 Date: September 12, 2025 To: Mayor and Council Thru: John Pombier, Acting City Manager Dawn Lang, Deputy City Manager/CFO DLL From: Matt Dunbar, Budget & Policy Director MD Subject: Fiscal Year End (FYE) 2024-25 Fourth Quarter Financial Report Attached is the FYE 2024-25 Fourth Quarter Financial Report, summarizing budget to actual performance of General Fund operating revenue and expenditures and additional summaries and analysis of Enterprise, System Development Fees, Highway User Revenue, and Grant funds. The FYE Quarterly report is typically released in August/September of each year due to the extended fiscal year end accounting process, which ensures all revenues and expenditures are thoroughly reviewed and properly reflected. The analysis included in this report provides the year-end details of FYE 2024-25 by reflecting budget to actual compared to historical trends and the prior year. These historical comparisons are based on actual results compared to budget over the last four years (FY 2020-21 to FY 202324), and an explanation has been provided in those areas where there are significant deviations from the historical trend or the prior year’s results. When reviewing revenue trends, all General Fund revenue performance indicators are showing as positive with the exception of Franchise Fees. The General Fund FYE reflected overall revenue growth of 6.6% above adopted budget with 106.6% of budgeted revenues received compared to a 116.1% historical average received. Overall, General Fund revenue, led by continuing Sales Tax collections, is performing well due to slightly higher local consumer spending with related inflation, but with a slower stream of development activity. The expansion of Intel continued to slow during the year, which shows in certain revenues having planned reductions from the prior year. It is anticipated that once the development is completed, revenues will stabilize in these categories, classifying any remaining additional revenue increases as one-time. Memo No. 26-019 September 12, 2025 Page 2 During the preparation of the FY 2025-26 Budget, projected FY 2024-25 year-end revenues were updated based on actual collections reflected in this report from January 2025 and other information available at that time. This allowed for the estimating of the fiscal year end General Fund balance used to calculate available one-time funds for use in the FY 2025-26 budget. The final net impact of the additional one-time funds, (i.e. revenues, expenditures and carryforwards) is being calculated in the new year. Additionally, General Fund expenditures ended at 93.5% of budget at FYE compared to 91.9% for the prior fiscal year. Should you have additional questions regarding this information, please contact me at x2256 or Dawn Lang at x2255. Attachment: FYE 2024-25 Fourth Quarter Financial Report c: Tadd Wille, Assistant City Manager Ryan Peters, Deputy City Manager Leah Powell, Deputy City Manager Quarterly Financial Report 4th Qtr FY 2024-25 Performance at a Glance General Fund Revenues Year to Date Compared Historical % Reference POSITIVE Page 2 Report Overview and Economic Indicators Revenue Analysis Overall General Fund Revenues Quarterly Analysis Overall General Fund Revenue by Category Analysis Revenue Detail by Category Performance Indicator* Positive Negative Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Page 3 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 5 Page 6 Page 6 Page 7 Page 7 Year to Date Compared Budget % Reference Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Page 8 Page 8 Page 9 Page 9 Page 10 Page 10 Page 11 Page 11 Page 12 Page 12 Page 13 Page 13 Page 14 Page 14 Page 15 Page 15 Page 16 Page 16 Year to Date Compared Budget % Reference Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Informational Informational Page 17 Page 17 Page 18 Page 18 Page 19 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Positive Sales Tax - Overall & by Taxable Activity Franchise Fees Primary Property Tax State Shared Revenues Licenses & Permits Charges for Services Other Revenues General Fund Expenditures General Fund Expenditure + Encumbrance Analysis by Function and by Expenditure Category Mayor & Council City Clerk Law City Magistrate City Manager & Organizational Support Communications & Public Affairs Cultural Development Expenditure Community Services Detail by Information Technology Department Management Services Neighborhood Resources Non-Departmental Development Services Public Works & Utilities Fire Police Enterprise / Other Funds Water Fund Analysis Wastewater Fund Analysis Reclaimed Water Fund Analysis Solid Waste Fund Analysis Airport Fund Analysis Highway User Revenue Fund Analysis System Development Fee Analysis Grants PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (At year-end, revenues performance indicators default to positive when 100% or more of budget is collected and expenditures performance indicators default to positive when total spending is less than adjusted budget) * Positive Warning Negative = Rev: Variance is above or <2% below historical trend. Exp: Variance <= 2% compared to historical trend. = Rev: Variance of 2 - 5% below historical trends. Exp: Variance of 2 - 5% above historical trends. = Rev: Variance of > 5% below historical trends. Exp: Variance > 5% above historical trend. 1 9/19/2025 THE QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT Report Objectives * Provide historical comparisons to identify trends or deviations from trends. * Develop performance benchmarks to measure positive and negative results. * Create an executive level report to highlight potential issues or concerns. What is Included in the Report The report emphasizes General Fund, with analysis of its revenue and each category of revenue, and the expenditures by department. Also included is a summary and analysis of Enterprise Funds, System Development Fee and Impact Fee Funds, the Highway User Tax Fund, and Grants. How to Read the Report * Page 1 serves as a table of contents and quick view of performance issues. * The benchmarks are Positive (navy colored), Warning (grey colored), and Negative (maroon colored), providing an initial indicator to determine if the category needs to be monitored closely in the upcoming period or if it is deviating from trends. * Performance indicators for General Fund revenues are comparing the percent of year-to-date actuals collected to total budget AND the budget prorated based on the historical trend (last four years) of average actual year-to-date collections to budget. * Performance indicators for General Fund expenditures are based on whether they are within budget for the percent of year-to-date actuals expended plus encumbrances compared to the total budgeted expenditures. * Performance indicators for Enterprise Funds focus on the relationship between Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses (including debt service and indirect cost allocation) and the percentage of budget received/expended. ECONOMIC INDICATORS Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Interest Rates Real gross domestic product - the output of goods and services produced by This table reflects the four most recent changes to the Federal Funds Rate labor and property located in the US. Reflects spending for households, by the Federal Reserve Board. business, government, and trade. The change to the GDP is an indicator of the general direction of the Lowering the Federal Funds Rate is a way for the Federal Reserve Board to economy. Slow or negative growth will likely mean lower revenues for the make it less expensive for banks to borrow money for loans and City. investments and (in theory) pumping additional dollars into the economy. Third Quarter 2024 (third estimate) Fourth Quarter 2024 First Quarter 2025 Second Quarter 2025 (advance estimate) Source: U.S. Department of Commerce 3.1% 2.4% -0.5% 3.0% 5.25%-5.50% 4.75%-5.00% 4.50%-4.75% 4.25%-4.50% July 27, 2023 September 19, 2024 November 8, 2024 December 19, 2024 Source: Federal Reserve Bank Unemployment National State of Arizona Phoenix Metro Area* Mar-25 4.2% 4.0% Apr-25 3.9% 3.5% 3.6% 3.1% May-25 4.0% 4.1% 3.7% 4.5% 4.0% Jun-25 4.4% High unemployment rates typically result in a reduced demand for goods and services. *Source: Arizona Office of Economic Opportunity Monthly Employment Report (not seasonally adjusted) City Investment Portfolio Building Permits The City splits its investment portfolio between two investment firms with a Single-family building permits are an indicator of the general economy. different mix of holdings at each firm to reduce risk. Current Earning Higher numbers of permits indicate an active construction market and Benchmarks are as follows: resultant home sales. Fewer building permits generally equates to less new construction, and permit fees and construction sales tax revenues. Allspring benchmark is ICE BofA 0-3 year U.S. Treasury Index PFM's benchmark is ICE BofAML 1-5 year U.S. Treasury Index Chandler's quarterly average for single family building permits is 70.25 for FY Rate of Return is net of fees and includes interest earnings as well as both 2023-24, up from the 14.5 average permits per quarter in FY 2022-23. The realized and unrealized gains/(losses). Rate of Return is typically negative in average for FY 2024-25 is 42.5. a rising rate environment. Fiscal Year 2024-25 Rate of Return Benchmark Allspring Global Investments Benchmark PFM Asset Management, LLC Fiscal Year 2023-24 Rate of Return Benchmark Allspring Global Investments Benchmark PFM Asset Management, LLC 4th Quarter 1.18% 1.27% 1.36% 1.49% 4th Quarter 0.94% 1.03% 0.82% 0.89% Fiscal Year 5.67% 5.74% 6.07% 6.20% Fiscal Year 4.69% 5.09% 4.16% 4.45% Quarter Apr - May - Jun 2023 Jul - Aug - Sep 2023 Oct - Nov - Dec 2023 Jan - Feb - Mar 2024 Apr - May - Jun 2024 Jul - Aug - Sep 2024 Oct - Nov - Dec 2024 Jan - Feb - Mar 2025 Apr - May - Jun 2025 State of Arizona 8,799 9,858 9,164 11,192 10,967 10,380 8,973 9,855 9,429 Chandler 24 110 87 29 55 42 46 51 31 Source: Investment Advisors 2 9/19/2025 General Fund Revenue Analysis: Overall General Fund Revenues FY 2024-25 3r FY 24 Actual Revenue FY 25 FY 25 % of *% of Adopted Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Rec'd Hist. Rec'd 80,607,440 $ 88,779,243 24.1% 23.4% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 91,658,492 100,807,419 27.4% 29.4% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 92,931,103 99,446,709 27.0% 29.0% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 103,036,766 103,653,593 28.1% 34.3% 368,233,801 $ 392,686,964 106.6% 116.1% 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 Total $ $ Dollars in Millions FY 25 Actual Revenue Historical Trend Actual to Budget 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 * Pro-rated based upon a four year historical trend of actual year-to-date collections 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive General Fund revenue collections for FY 2024-25 were $24.5M (6.6%) above the adopted budget and $8.9M (2.2%) less than actual collections for FY 202324. Overall, General Fund revenue increases are led by higher collection of local sales taxes, although this increase will be slowing as the residental rental tax elimination, which began in January 2025, is now reflected. These categories performed well due to level local consumer spending including related inflation, and development activity (although slowing in residential housing) in Chandler. The continued $20B expansion of Intel, the largest development during this time period, continues to affect revenues in various categories. As this project winds down, we anticipate reductions in several categories. Once the development is complete, revenues will stabalize, classifying much of this additional revenue as one-time. The performance indicator is positive as actual overall collections exceeded the amount budgeted at fiscal year-end. The following charts provide more detail regarding the various sources of General Fund revenues and provide more detail on the performance indicators. Overall General Fund Revenues by Category FY 2024-25 FY 25 % of Budget Adopted Actual Rec'd to Budget Revenue Date FY 25 Revenue Categories Sales Tax $ Franchise Fees 197,908,400 $ 204,965,247 3,650,000 2,807,599 80% 76.9% 8,783,722 8,431,138 96.0% State Shared Sales Tax 116,408,000 119,262,712 102.5% Licenses & Permits 6,978,300 13,818,609 198.0% Charges for Services 15,707,789 16,824,743 107.1% Other Revenues 10,265,308 17,928,857 174.7% Indirect Cost Allocation 8,532,282 8,648,060 101.4% 368,233,801 $ 392,686,964 106.6% $ 100% Other Revenues 103.6% Primary Property Tax Total General Fund Collection History by Category % Indirect Costs 28% 29% 34% 30% 60% 40% 57% 55% 52% 52% 20% State Shared Revenue Primary Property Taxes Franchise Fees Local Sales Taxes 0% FY22 $315M Positive Charges for Services Licenses & Permits FY23 $373M FY24 $402M FY25 $392M This chart summarizes General Fund revenue collections by revenue category for FY 2024-25. The graph helps us visualize what percentage each revenue category is to the total General Fund. The percentage spread of revenue sources are relatively consistent over the years with local sales taxes and State Shared Sales Tax Revenues being the largest General Fund revenue sources. The next several pages provide an analysis of each revenue category except Indirect Cost Allocation (payments by the Water, Wastewater, Reclaimed Water, Solid Waste, and Airport Enterprise Funds to the General Fund for city services provided for their operations). The performance indicator is positive as actual collections came in higher than budget. 3 9/19/2025 General Fund Revenue Analysis (continued): Sales Tax Revenue FY 2024-25 FY 24 Actual Revenue FY 25 % of *% of Adopted Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Rec'd Hist. Rec'd 46,982,983 $ 50,450,498 25.5% 29.2% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 48,458,357 53,648,248 27.1% 30.1% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 50,463,224 52,374,128 26.5% 31.2% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 52,003,836 48,492,373 24.5% 29.6% 197,908,400 $ 204,965,247 103.6% 120.1% 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 Total $ $ FY 25 Actual Revenue Historical Trend Actual to Budget 60 Dollars in Millions FY 25 50 40 30 20 10 * Pro-rated based upon a four year historical trend of actual year-to-date collections 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Figures above include General Fund local sales tax collections and the related revenues of license fees, audit assessments, penalties, and interest. Sales tax collections for FY 2024-25 were $7.1M (3.6%) above adopted budget and $5.8M (2.7%) less than FY 2023-24 actual collections which was anticipated with the reduction in the residential rental classification. The performance indicator is positive as actual collections exceeded the amount budgeted at fiscal year-end. Sales Tax Collection History FY 25 FY 25 % of Adopted Actual Actual to from Budget Revenue Budget Prior Yr. 4 Years Actual Sales Tax by Category (in millions) % Chg Retail/Mfd. Bldg/Jet Fuel $ Contracting 92,000,000 $ 98,165,564 106.7% 0.4% FY 21-22 23,700,000 19,093,138 80.6% -24.5% Utilities 21,950,000 21,104,109 96.1% 14.0% FY 22-23 Real Property Rentals 18,000,000 20,707,698 115.0% -15.9% Restaurants & Bars 17,500,000 18,924,739 108.1% 2.6% Telecommunications 1,550,000 1,677,975 108.3% -18.0% Personal Prop. Rentals Hotels/Motels 5,500,000 6,315,805 114.8% -12.8% 6,800,000 6,726,031 98.9% -0.2% Publishing/Printing/Adv. Amusements 200,000 208,311 104.2% 19.1% 1,300,000 1,963,222 151.0% 16.1% Use Tax 7,500,000 6,909,195 92.1% 69.4% Total Sales Tax $ 196,000,000 $ 201,795,787 103.0% -2.3% 85 17 92 16 28 FY 23-24 98 25 FY 24-25 98 19 0 70 21 16 17 23 19 21 18 25 21 18 19 140 210 Retail Contracting Utilities Real Property Rentals Restaurants & Bars Telecommunications Personal Prop. Rentals Hotels/Motels Publishing/Printing Amusements Use Tax The above figures reflect General Fund sales tax collections by category and exclude the related revenues of license fees, audit assessments, penalties, and interest. Sales tax collections for FY 2024-25 were $5.8M (3.0%) above the adopted budget and $4.8M (2.3%) less than FY 2023-24 actual collections. It should be noted that many of the categories are positive, reflecting continued consumer spending, although slowing from the prior year as Intel winds down their project. Contracting/development collections and Personal Property Rentals are down as the Intel project slows and residential rental tax elimination has impacted the Real Property Rentals category. Use tax is a highly fluctuating revenue category and significant swings in collection percentage are not abnormal. 4 9/19/2025 General Fund Revenue Analysis (continued): Franchise Fee Revenue FY 2024-25 Jul - Sep 24 $ 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 FY 25 % of *% of Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Rec'd Hist. Rec'd 38,748 $ 85,527 2.3% 1.1% 743,734 656,917 18.0% 22.0% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 1,622,522 1,694,658 46.4% 48.0% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 1,244,996 370,497 10.2% 36.9% 2,807,599 76.9% 108.0% Total $ 3,650,000 $ Actual Revenue FY 25 Actual Revenue 3r Historical Trend Actual to Budget Dollars in Thousands 1st Qtr FY 25 Adopted FY 24 1,800 1,500 1,200 900 600 300 - * Pro-rated based upon a four year historical trend of actual year-to-date collections 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Negative Franchise fees are paid by Arizona Public Service (2% of commercial and residential sales), Southwest Gas Corporation (2% of commercial and residential sales), Cox Communications (5% of gross revenue), Air Products (2% of gross sales), and Western Broadband (5% of gross sales). Franchise fee collections for FY 2024-25 were $842,401 (23.1%) below the adopted budget and $575,452 (17.0%) less than FY 2023-24 actual collections. The performance indicator is a negative as the percentage of budget received was five or more percentage points below the historical budget received at fiscal year-end. Additonal review is ongoing in the drop in the cable franchise category of revenue collected to quantify if the reduction in the current year was related to one-time revenue decreases or should be updated to reflect ongoing changes to revenues. Primary Property Tax Revenue FY 2024-25 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 FY 25 % of Adopted Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Rec'd Hist. Rec'd 57,547 $ *% of 29,138 0.3% 0.7% 4,493,935 4,180,738 47.6% 51.3% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 839,121 899,839 10.2% 9.6% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 3,393,119 3,321,423 37.8% 38.8% 8,431,138 95.9% 100.4% Total $ 8,783,722 $ FY 24 Actual Revenue FY 25 Actual Revenue Historical Trend Actual to Budget Dollars in Millions FY 25 5 4 3 2 1 - * Pro-rated based upon a four year historical trend of actual year-to-date collections 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive This presentation only includes primary property taxes (supporting General Fund operations) and does not include secondary property taxes (supporting debt service on capital projects and recorded in the General Obligation Debt Service Fund). Property tax collections are due starting October 1st and March 1st each year. For FY 2024-25, Chandler is collecting a primary tax rate of $0.2126 per $100 of assessed valuation and a secondary tax rate of $0.87 per $100 of assessed valuation for a total rate of $1.0826, representing a $0.01 cent decrease from the rates adopted in the prior year. This reduction helps offset some of the City's assessed valuation increase of 4.7% related to appreciation, which resulted in a small net tax increase for the median value homeowner. Primary property tax collections for FY 2024-25 were $352,584 (4.0%) below the adopted budget and $195,503 (2.3%) less than FY 2023-24 actual collections. The majority of collections come in the second and fourth quarters since the first half of the property tax bills are due in October and the second half are due in March. The performance indicator is a warning as the percentage of budget received was between two to five percentage points below the historical budget received at fiscal year-end, however with the reductions anticipated due to the Qasimyar court ruling, the indicator was changed to positive as the reduction in revenue was anticipated. The Qasimyar vs. Maricopa County Class Action Lawsuit refunds impacted taxpayers that changed the use of their home from a residential home to a rental home between 2015 and 2021 when the home values had been lower. 5 9/19/2025 General Fund Revenue Analysis (continued): FY 25 FY 25 % of *% of Adopted Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Rec'd Hist. Rec'd 25,866,242 $ 26,203,145 22.5% 25.4% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 28,657,188 29,889,623 25.7% 28.2% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 28,937,527 30,228,498 26.0% 28.8% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 32,947,043 32,941,444 28.3% 32.5% 116,408,000 $ 119,262,712 102.5% 115.0% 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 Total $ $ Dollars in Millions State Shared Sales Tax Revenues FY 2024-25 FY 24 Actual Revenue FY 25 Actual Revenue Historical Trend Actual to Budget 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 * Pro-rated based upon a four year historical trend of actual year-to-date collections 5 1st Qtr Positive 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr -- State Shared Sales Tax Revenue: The State sales tax rate is currently 5.6%, of which a portion of the various categories of sales tax are distributed to cities and towns based on population as State Shared Sales Tax Revenue. Collections for FY 2024-25 were $1.5M (3.6%) above adopted budget and $623,859 (1.5%) higher than FY 2023-24 actual collections. -- Smart and Safe (State Shared Revenue): Prop 207 was approved by voters in 2020 and created a 16% excise tax on the sale of recreational marijuana effective 2021. Fire and Police departments receive revenue based on the number of employees enrolled in PSPRS at the time. Collections for FY 2024-25 were $307,970 (23.5%) above adopted budget and $112,769 (7.5%) higher than FY2023-24 actual collections. -- Vehicle License Tax: Cities and towns receive 25% of the net revenues collected for vehicle licensing within their county from the State, as well as surcharges from vehicle rentals. The respective city share's are determined by the proportion of city population to total incorporated population of the county. Collections for FY 2024-25 were $1.6M (11.6%) above adopted budget and $674,629 (4.7%) higher than FY 2023-24 actual collections. -- Urban Revenue Sharing: Eighteen percent (18%) of the 2022 State income tax collection is distributed to cities and towns as urban revenue sharing based upon estimated population. Collections for FY 2024-25 were $500,653 (0.8%) below adopted budget and $14.8M (19.9%) less than FY 2023-24 actual collections, which reflects the known reduction as the full impact of the flat tax went into effect. The overall State Shared revenue performance indicator is positive as actual collections exceeded the amount budgeted at fiscal year-end. 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ FY 25 FY 25 % of *% of Adopted Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Rec'd Hist. Rec'd 875,785 $ 3,745,777 53.7% 13.3% 24.2% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 1,597,039 3,501,261 50.2% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 2,210,135 4,204,073 60.2% 33.4% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 2,295,341 2,367,498 33.9% 34.7% 13,818,609 198.0% 105.6% Total $ 6,978,300 $ * Pro-rated based upon a four year historical trend of actual year-to-date collections Dollars in Thousands Licenses & Permits Revenue FY 2024-25 FY 24 Actual Revenue FY 25 Actual Revenue Historical Trend Actual to Budget 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive This category includes revenue for various licenses: transaction privilege (sales) tax, alcoholic beverages, transient merchants, peddlers and solicitors, secondhand and junk dealers, amusements, business registrations, and professional/occupational licenses, as well as cable license application fees. In addition, revenue from building, alarm, and fiber optic permits are included. License and permit collections for FY 2024-25 were $6.8M (98.0%) above adopted budget and $8.7M (171.2%) higher than FY 2023-24 actual collections. Lower collections for FY 2023-24 were anticipated as large industrial permits inflated the historical comparison, however we are also seeing a slowing of other permit related revenues. Higher collections in the first three quarters of FY 2024-25 reflects large reciepts recorded for industrial permits. The performance indicator is positive as actual collections exceeded the amount budgeted at fiscal year-end. 6 9/19/2025 General Fund Revenue Analysis (continued): Charges for Services Revenue FY 2024-25 Jul - Sep 24 % of *% of Budget Budget Budget Revenue Rec'd Hist. Rec'd 2,612,176 $ 3,152,083 20.1% 19.9% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3,268,215 3,103,026 19.7% 24.9% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 4,037,491 3,631,977 23.1% 30.8% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 5,789,907 6,937,657 44.2% 44.2% 16,824,743 107.1% 119.8% Total $ FY 25 Actual $ 15,707,789 $ Actual Revenue FY 25 Actual Revenue 3r Historical Trend Actual to Budget Dollars in Millions 1st Qtr FY 25 Adopted FY 24 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - * Pro-rated based upon a four year historical trend of actual year-to-date collections 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Charges for Services includes revenue from various engineering, recreation, and library fees, police and fire miscellaneous service reimbursements, and public school reimbursements. Charges for services collections for FY 2024-25 were $1.1M (7.1%) above the adopted budget and $975,172 (5.5%) less than FY 2023-24 actual collections. The performance indicator is positive as actual collections exceeded the amount budgeted at fiscal year-end. Other Revenue FY 2024-25 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 % of *% of Adopted Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Rec'd Hist. Rec'd 2,040,885 $ 2,980,005 29.0% 21.4% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 2,306,957 3,694,536 36.0% 21.3% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 2,688,011 4,280,463 41.7% 37.9% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 3,229,455 6,973,853 67.9% 74.2% 17,928,857 174.6% 154.8% Total $ FY 25 $ 10,265,308 $ Dollars in Millions FY 25 FY 24 Actual Revenue FY 25 Actual Revenue Historical Trend Actual to Budget 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - * Pro-rated based upon a four year historical trend of actual year-to-date collections 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Other revenue captures interest income, fines and forfeitures, court fees, sale of land and fixed assets, and other miscellaneous items. Revenue streams in this category are not constant. Higher collections in the first three quarters of FY 2024-25 reflects interest income due to higher balances and rates. Other revenue collections for FY 2024-25 were $7.7M (74.7%) above adopted budget and $4.8M (37.0%) higher than FY 2023-24 actual collections. The performance indicator is positive as actual collections exceeded the amount budgeted at fiscal year-end. 7 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis: General Fund Expenditures + Encumbrances for FY 2024-25 by Function Dollars in Millions * Dept. Operating General Government $ FY 25 FY 25 % of % of Adjusted Actual Budget Budget Budget Exp+Enc Exp'd Prior Yr. 87,097,455 $ 78,898,328 90.6% 88.4% Community Services 37,813,290 35,522,571 93.9% 93.8% Development Services 15,211,467 13,452,353 88.4% 86.7% Public Safety 165,209,866 159,737,617 96.7% 96.4% Public Works & Utilities 11,721,967 10,480,775 89.4% 89.1% Neighborhood Resources Non-Dept. Pers. & O&M 10,061,563 8,712,996 86.6% 81.9% 11,438,477 Subtotal $ 338,554,085 Non-Dept. Reserves $ Non-Dept. Contingencies Total $ 9,667,060 84.5% 88.2% 316,471,700 93.5% 91.9% 2,948,194 $ - 0.0% 0.0% 37,404,988 - 0.0% 0.0% 83.5% 80.6% $ 378,907,267 $ 316,471,700 * Excluding Interfund Transfers 10 34 8 68 75 13 36 9 79 10 Development Services Community Services Neighborhood Resources General Government Non-Dept. Pers. & O&M 149 160 11 10 FY 24 Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Public Safety Public Works & Utilities Total General Fund operating expenditures and encumbrances are reflected by City function, along with budgeted non-departmental reserves (encumbrance and unencumbered carryforward, utility, fuel, and downtown redevelopment) and contingencies (15% of revenues and Council Contingency). Since General Obligation debt and General Fund capital expenditures are reflected in the General Obligation Debt and General Capital Projects Funds, this presentation only includes General Fund operating expenditures to more clearly reflect the results of operations. The chart reflects fiscal year-end actual spending and encumbrances for FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25. Non-Dept. The Personnel and O&M (maroon category) decrease mainly reflects the difference in the amount of the prior year's payment of $73M towards the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS) unfunded liability payoff, to the current year's payment of $7M. Public Safety's (blue category) increase mainly reflects higher personnel and technology related costs. General Government (green category) increased due to professional services, higher utilities citywide reflected in Building & Facilities, and personnel costs. All other areas remained fairly consistent. FY 2024-25 operating expended and encumbered at fiscal year-end reflects 93.5% of the adjusted budget compared to 91.9% of adjusted budget spent and encumbered in the prior year. As shown on the following pages, departments (excluding non-departmental) have expended between 85.8% and 98.4% of their General Fund adjusted budgets for FY 2024-25. General Fund Expenditures + Encumbrances for FY 2024-25 by Category FY 25 FY 25 FY 24 % Change Adjusted Actual Actual from Prior Budget Exp+Enc Exp+Enc Yr. Actual 246,577,673 $ 237,657,306 $ 281,814,521 Operations & Maint. 91,976,412 78,814,394 Reserves/Contingencies 40,353,182 *Dept. Operating Personnel Total $ $ 378,907,267 $ 316,471,700 73,281,950 - -15.7% 7.5% FY 2024-25 General Fund Actual Expenditures + Encumbrances Operations & Maint. 25% 0.0% $ 355,096,471 * Excluding Interfund Transfers -10.9% Personnel 75% Total General Fund operating expenditures and encumbrances are reflected by spending category. Personnel spending for FY 2024-25 is 15.7% less than spending for FY 2023-24. The majority of the decrease was due the $7M payment to the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS), versus $73M in the prior year and also includes other citywide personnel cost increases and FTE changes. Operations and maintenance spending through for FY 2024-25 is 7.5% higher than spending for FY 2023-24. Some of the increase reflected higher spending and encumbrances for Fire, Police, Neighborhood Resources, and IT professional services. 8 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis (continued / department summaries): Mayor & Council Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr 300,500 $ 324,241 23.9% 22.1% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 320,761 304,471 22.5% 20.3% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 363,117 344,460 25.4% 23.4% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 372,783 348,713 25.6% 24.1% 1,321,885 97.4% 89.9% Total $ FY 25 $ 1,357,161 $ Dollars in Thousands *Avg Hist. FY 24 Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive The Mayor and Council division spent 97.4% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and has historically spent 89.9% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first three quarters of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in personnel costs. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. City Clerk Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr 434,375 $ 353,897 23.1% 28.4% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 349,635 330,005 21.5% 19.9% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 383,722 327,281 21.4% 22.1% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 363,653 302,843 19.8% 20.7% 1,314,026 85.8% 91.1% Total $ FY 25 $ 1,531,385 $ Dollars in Thousands *Avg Hist. FY 24 Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 500 400 300 200 100 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive City Clerk includes the following cost centers: City Clerk and Records Management. The department spent 85.8% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and has historically spent 91.1% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first three quarters of FY 2024-25 compared to FY 2023-24 reflected election expenses and the new Records Managment cost center which was established in FY 2024-25. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. 9 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis (continued / department summaries): Law Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. $ 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr 1,269,110 $ 1,302,529 26.0% 25.3% 1,209,211 1,139,259 22.8% 23.7% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 1,286,097 1,358,455 27.1% 25.3% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 1,243,833 1,127,104 22.5% 24.4% 4,927,347 98.4% 98.7% Total $ 5,008,251 $ Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 1,600 Dollars in Thousands Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 FY 25 FY 24 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Law spent 98.4% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and has historically spent 98.7% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. City Magistrate Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr 1,348,031 $ 1,780,679 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 1,605,953 1,106,023 18.1% 20.4% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 1,556,502 1,376,856 22.6% 19.6% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 1,592,689 1,165,438 19.1% 20.2% 5,428,996 89.0% 82.3% Total $ FY 25 $ 6,103,175 $ 29.2% 22.1% Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 2,000 Dollars in Thousands Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 FY 25 FY 24 1,600 1,200 800 400 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive City Magistrate spent 89.0% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and has historically spent 82.3% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first quarter of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in professional services (a large encumbrance for public defender services in the first quarter that was spent down throughout the year) and personnel costs. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. 10 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis (continued / department summaries): City Manager & Organizational Support Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison 1st Qtr Actual Expend FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget FY 25 FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 6,846,536 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 8,680,550 36.3% 28.7% 6,144,018 4,230,275 17.7% 20.6% Jan - Mar 25 5,522,800 4,528,438 19.0% 18.0% Apr - Jun 25 5,374,468 4,319,913 18.1% 16.8% $ 23,887,822 $ 21,759,176 91.1% 84.1% Total $ Dollars in Millions Operating Only FY 24 *Avg Hist. 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1st Qtr * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive City Manager & Organizational Support includes the following divisions budgeted in the General Fund: Administration, Buildings & Facilities, Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion, Economic Development, Fleet Services, Human Resources, Transportation Policy, as well as Cultural Development which is shown separately. Combined these divisions spent 91.1% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 84.1% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first quarter of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in professional services (a large encumbrance in Transportation Policy in the first quarter that was spent down throughout the year), higher utilities citywide reflected in Building & Facilities, and personnel costs. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. Communications & Public Affairs Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison Operating Only 1st Qtr FY 25 FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr Budget Jul - Sep 24 $ 1,178,078 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 1,157,820 28.6% 29.1% 934,393 920,079 22.7% 17.3% Jan - Mar 25 926,213 906,627 22.4% 17.0% Apr - Jun 25 1,012,751 704,475 17.4% 19.0% 3,689,001 91.1% 82.4% Total $ 4,051,435 $ $ Dollars in Thousands *Avg Hist. FY 24 Actual Expend FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 1,800 1,500 1,200 900 600 300 1st Qtr * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Communications and Public Affairs (CAPA) spent 91.1% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 82.4% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first quarter of FY 2023-24 compared to FY 2024-25 was for planned one-time expenses for marketing/promotional and talent recruitment campaigns. Higher spending in the second quarter of FY 2024-25 compared to FY 2023-24 was for studio equipment cost associated with the government access channel. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. 11 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis (continued / department summaries): Cultural Development Expenditure 2024-25 Comparison Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr $ 1,603,625 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 1,503,507 26.9% 28.7% 1,271,570 1,249,973 22.3% 21.7% 1,313,684 1,278,454 23.0% 22.4% 1,400,814 1,345,727 24.0% 24.0% 5,377,661 96.2% 96.8% $ 5,589,693 $ $ 2,000 Dollars in Thousands FY 25 Adjusted Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 Total FY 24 *Avg Hist. 1,600 1,200 800 400 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Cultural Development includes the following cost centers: Administration, Center for the Arts, Downtown Redevelopment, Museum, and Special Events, and is considered part of City Manager, Organizational Support. The department spent 96.2% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 96.8% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. Community Services Expenditure 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 12,989,329 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 Total $ 12,390,805 32.8% 34.4% 8,141,412 7,544,872 20.0% 19.4% 7,689,649 8,144,843 21.5% 18.2% 8,992,900 7,442,051 19.7% 21.7% $ 37,813,290 $ 35,522,571 93.9% 93.7% Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 16 Dollars in Millions FY 25 FY 24 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Community Services includes the following divisions budgeted in the General Fund: Administration, Aquatics, Library, Nature & Recreation Facilities, Park Maintenance & Operations, Recreation, and Sports & Fitness Facilities. The department spent 93.9% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 93.7% of their adjusted budget through for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the third quarter of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in personnel and park maintenance. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. 12 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis (continued / department summaries): Information Technology Expenditure 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget 14 Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr 12 Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 9,234,114 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 12,907,965 42.7% 30.5% 5,372,906 3,250,476 10.7% 14.2% Jan - Mar 25 5,784,196 4,074,541 13.4% 15.6% Apr - Jun 25 9,857,197 6,018,363 20.0% 29.1% $ 30,248,413 $ 26,251,345 86.8% 89.4% Total $ Dollars in Millions FY 25 FY 25 FY 24 Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 10 8 6 4 2 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Information Technology spent 86.8% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 89.4% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first quarter of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in professional services (large encumbrances for various contracts in the first quarter that were spent down throughout the year) and personnel costs. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. Management Services Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr Budget Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 2,406,188 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 2,482,830 26.6% 25.8% 2,219,787 1,973,352 21.1% 19.5% Jan - Mar 25 2,380,379 2,332,601 25.1% 21.2% Apr - Jun 25 2,313,766 2,040,108 21.9% 20.5% 8,828,891 94.7% 87.0% Total $ 9,320,120 $ $ Actual Exp+Enc Actual Exp+Enc Series2 Series3 Historical Trend Actual to Budget 2,800 3 Dollars Millions Dollars inin Thousands FY 25 FY 24 FY 25 Series1 2,400 2,000 2 1,600 1,200 1 800 400 0- * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Management Services Department includes the following divisions budgeted in the General Fund: Administration, Accounting, Budget, Central Supply, Purchasing, Tax & License, and Utility Services (reimbursed by the Public Works & Utilities Department, Water/Wastewater/Solid Waste, through the Indirect Cost Allocation). These divisions spent 94.7% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 87.0% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first three quarters of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in personnel costs with a new positions added to the Budget and Tax & License Divisions and vacancies filled. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. 13 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis (continued / department summaries): Neighborhood Resources Expenditure 2024-25 Comparison Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr FY 25 Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 1,181,725 3,029,170 30.1% 11.7% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3,544,367 2,809,729 28.0% 24.8% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 2,402,485 1,544,357 15.2% 13.4% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 2,932,986 1,329,740 13.2% 18.7% 8,712,996 86.6% 68.6% Total $ 10,061,563 $ $ Dollar in Thousands FY 24 *Avg Hist. 3,000 2,400 1,800 1,200 600 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Neighborhood Resources includes the following cost centers budgeted in the General Fund: Administration, Housing & Redevelopment, Neighborhood Preservation, and Community Development. The department spent 86.6% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 68.6% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first quarter of FY 2024-25 compared to FY 2023-24 reflected the timing shift of encumbrances from the prior year between the first and second quarter. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. Non-Departmental Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 7,388,360 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 8,567,468 74.9% 65.1% 1,061,572 394,754 3.5% 2.2% Jan - Mar 25 2,864,827 334,091 2.9% 19.3% Apr - Jun 25 123,718 370,747 3.2% 1.1% 9,667,060 84.5% 87.7% Total** $ 11,438,477 $ $ Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget Dollars in Millions FY 25 FY 25 FY 24 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr ** Excludes Reserves and Contingencies 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Non-Departmental includes citywide costs that do not belong to a specific department or are infrequent/unusual (i.e., memberships, legal fees, studies, strategic economic development opportunities, and miscellaneous downtown redevelopment expenses). Spending in this category fluctuates due to changing one-time needs from year to year. Non-departmental planned spending for FY 2024-25 is 84.5% of the adjusted budget and has historically spent 87.7% of the adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in FY 2023-24 compared to FY 2024-25 reflects the decreased payment to the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS) payment in the amount of $7.0M, which was $73M in the prior year. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. 14 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis (continued / department summaries): Development Services Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 3,518,496 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 Total $ 3,376,299 22.2% 23.1% 3,636,648 2,611,437 17.2% 20.0% 3,989,901 4,864,701 32.0% 22.4% 4,066,422 2,599,916 17.0% 21.9% $ 15,211,467 $ 13,452,353 88.4% 87.4% Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 5 Dollars in Millions FY 25 FY 25 FY 24 4 3 2 1 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Development Services includes the following cost centers: Administration, Construction Management and Permits, Building Safety, Transportation Engineering, Engineering, and Planning. The department spent 88.4% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 87.4% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first and third quarter of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in professional services and personnel costs related to the Fiber program. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. Public Works & Utilities Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget 7 Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr 6 Budget Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 $ 4,784,557 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 6,015,865 51.3% 40.8% 2,308,697 1,202,849 10.3% 17.1% Jan - Mar 25 2,748,412 2,244,460 19.0% 20.9% Apr - Jun 25 1,880,301 1,017,601 8.8% 13.6% $ 11,721,967 $ 10,480,775 89.4% 92.4% Total $ Dollars in Millions FY 25 FY 24 Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 5 4 3 2 1 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Public Works & Utilities includes the following divisions budgeted in the General Fund: Administration, Capital Projects, Traffic Engineering, Streets, and Street Sweeping. The department spent 89.4% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 92.4% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. 15 9/19/2025 General Fund Expenditure Analysis (continued / department summaries): Fire Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget 18 Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr 15 14,881,379 $ 16,659,832 31.7% 28.3% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 12,226,572 10,577,470 20.2% 22.8% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 13,122,691 11,985,138 22.7% 24.5% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 12,338,115 10,568,304 20.1% 23.0% 49,790,744 94.7% 98.6% Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 Total $ $ 52,568,757 $ Dollars in Millions FY 25 FY 24 Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 12 9 6 3 1st Qtr * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Fire includes the following cost centers: Administration, Health & Medical Services, Operations, Prevention & Preparedness, and Support Services. The department spent 94.7% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 98.6% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first quarter of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in professional services and personnel costs which included a one-time payment to the Post Employment Health Plan (PEHP) for all sworn members covered by the MOU. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. Police Expenditure FY 2024-25 Comparison *Avg Hist. FY 25 % of Budget Trend % Adjusted Actual Expended of Budget Budget Exp+Enc by Qtr by Qtr 30,064,061 $ 34,793,009 30.9% 26.7% 2nd Qtr Oct - Dec 24 27,151,580 23,704,887 21.0% 22.5% 3rd Qtr Jan - Mar 25 28,593,073 27,229,027 24.2% 23.8% 4th Qtr Apr - Jun 25 26,832,395 24,219,950 21.5% 22.1% $ 112,641,109 $ 109,946,873 97.6% 95.1% Operating Only 1st Qtr Jul - Sep 24 Total $ Actual Exp+Enc FY 25 Actual Exp+Enc Historical Trend Actual to Budget 40 Dollars in Millions FY 25 FY 24 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 - * Historical Trend represents the average of the past 4 years % of actual to budget 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Positive Police includes the following cost centers: Administration, Communications, Criminal Investigations, Detention Services, Field Operations, Forensic Services, Operational Support, Planning & Research, Professional Standards, Property & Evidence, Records, and Technology. The department spent 97.6% of their FY 2024-25 adjusted budget and have historically spent 95.1% of their adjusted budget for the fiscal year. Higher spending in the first quarter of FY 2024-25 reflected increases in personnel costs which included a one-time payment to the Post Employment Health Plan (PEHP) for all sworn members covered by the MOU. The result is a positive performance indicator as expenses are less than the adjusted budget. 16 9/19/2025 Enterprise Funds Enterprise Fund Analysis: Water Fund Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison Revenues $ Transfers In FY 25 Actual % of Budget % of Revenue/ Rec'd/Exp'd Budget Budget Exp+Enc to Date Prior Yr. 62,054,928 $ 63,993,093 103% 107% 1,839,514 1,839,514 100% 100% Total Revenues $ 63,894,442 $ 65,832,607 103% 106% Operating Expenses $ 45,027,818 $ 43,711,454 97% 94% Major Capital Expenses 39,420,546 31,631,781 80% 17% Debt Service 15,481,111 15,479,531 100% 90% Transfers Out 5,672,987 5,725,087 101% 100% 96,547,853 91% 65% Total Expenses $ 105,602,462 Net Rev / Exp $ (41,708,020) $ (30,715,246) Positive $ Water Fund Analysis Revenues Expenses 120 Dollars in Millions Water Fund FY 25 Adjusted 100 80 60 40 20 0 FY 24 Actual Q4 FY 25 Actual Q4 FY 25 Budget The performance indicator for Enterprise Funds focuses on the relationship between Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses (including debt service and indirect cost allocation) and the percentage of budget received/expended. The Water Operating Fund includes the following cost centers: Administration, Environmental Resources, Meter Services, San Tan Vista Water Treatment Plant, Water Capital, Water Distribution, Water Quality, Water Treatment Plant, and Water Systems Maintenance. The Water Operating Fund supports operating functions and major capital costs that can be paid without borrowing. The Net Revenue/Expense for FY 2024-25 reflects a $41.7M drawdown (including unspent capital carryforward from prior years) to fund balance due to increased pay as you go, as well as bond funded (sold in prior year) capital spending, and also assumes all appropriated operating and capital funds are spent, which is typically not the case. The budgeted Transfers In totaling $1,839,514 includes $450,714 for System Development Fee (SDF) loan paybacks and $1,388,800 from Reclaimed Water to pay towards related capital costs. The budgeted Transfers Out totaling $5,672,987 includes indirect cost allocation to the General Fund of $3,439,300, payment of $221,949 to the Technology Replacement Fund, payment of $600,000 to the Insured Liability Self-Insurance Fund, payment of $33,528 to the Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance Trust, payment of $23,511 to the Uninsured Liability Self-Insurance Fund, as well as a subsidy of $1,354,699 to the Reclaimed Water Fund to reflect benefits received. Year-to-date Operating Revenues are 103% compared to 107% for FY 2023-24, while Operating Expenses are 97% compared to 94% for FY 2023-24. This results in a positive performance indicator. Wastewater Fund Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison Revenues $ Transfers In FY 25 Actual % of Budget % of Revenue/ Rec'd/Exp'd Budget Budget Exp+Enc to Date Prior Yr. 50,795,566 $ 52,779,964 104% 100% 6,260,896 6,260,896 100% 100% Total Revenues $ 57,056,462 $ 59,040,860 103% 100% Operating Expenses $ 24,859,645 $ 22,868,666 92% 87% Major Capital Expenses 153,448,226 61,226,252 40% 49% Debt Service 19,008,615 19,002,114 100% 98% Transfers Out 4,464,800 4,503,007 101% 100% 201,781,286 $ 107,600,039 53% 58% Total Expenses Net Rev / Exp Positive $ $ (144,724,824) $ (48,559,179) Wastewater Fund Analysis Revenues Expenses 250 Dollars in Millions Wastewater Fund FY 25 Adjusted 200 150 100 50 0 FY 24 Actual Q4 FY 25 Actual Q4 FY 25 Budget The performance indicator for Enterprise Funds focuses on the relationship between Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses (including debt service and indirect cost allocation) and the percentage of budget received/expended. The Wastewater Operating Fund includes the following cost centers: Airport Water Reclamation Facility, Lone Butte Wastewater Treatment, Ocotillo Brine Reduction Facility, Ocotillo Water Reclamation Facility, Wastewater Capital, Wastewater Collection, and Wastewater Quality. The Wastewater Operating Fund supports operating functions and major capital costs that can be paid without borrowing. The Net Revenue/Expense for FY 2024-25 reflects a $144.7M drawdown (including unspent capital carryforward from prior years) to fund balance due to increased pay as you go, as well as bond funded (sold in prior year) capital spending, and also assumes all appropriated operating and capital funds are spent, which is typically not the case. The budgeted Transfers In totaling $6,260,896 includes $5M for System Development Fee (SDF) loan paybacks and $1,260,896 from Reclaimed Water towards related capital costs. The budgeted Transfers Out totaling $4,464,800 includes indirect cost allocation to the General Fund of $2,911,800, payment of $152,413 to the Technology Replacement Fund, payment of $22,377 to the Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance Trust, payment of $23,511 to the Uninsured Liability Self-Insurance Fund, as well as a subsidy of $1,354,699 to the Reclaimed Water Fund, reflecting benefits received. Year-to-date Operating Revenues are 104% compared to 100% for FY 2023-24, while Operating Expenses are 92% compared to 87% for FY 2023-24. This results in a positive performance indicator. 17 9/19/2025 Enterprise Funds Enterprise Fund Analysis (continued): Reclaimed Water Fund Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison % of Budget % of Adjusted Revenue/ Rec'd/Exp'd Budget $ Exp+Enc to Date Prior Yr. Transfers In 1,729,000 $ 2,709,398 Total Revenues $ Operating Expenses $ Transfers Out 1,946,563 113% 97% 2,709,398 100% 100% 105% 99% 4,438,398 $ 4,655,961 3,169,212 $ 3,158,552 100% 99% 2,783,214 100% 100% 100% 99% 2,783,214 Total Expenses $ 5,952,426 $ 5,941,766 Net Rev / Exp $ (1,514,028) $ (1,285,805) Positive Reclaimed Water Fund Analysis Revenues Expenses 6,000 Dollars in Thousands FY 25 Actual Budget Reclaimed Water Revenues FY 25 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 FY 24 Actual Q4 FY 25 Actual Q4 FY 25 Budget The performance indicator for Enterprise Funds focuses on the relationship between Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses (including debt service and indirect cost allocation) and the percentage of budget received/expended. The Reclaimed Water Operating Fund supports operating functions and now a portion of related capital costs. The Net Revenue/Expense for the FY 2024-25 budget reflects a drawdown to fund balance. The budgeted Transfers In totaling $2,709,398 includes subsidies from Water and Wastewater Funds of $1,354,699 each to reflect the benefit each fund receives by reclaiming water. The budgeted Transfers Out totaling $2,783,214 include an indirect cost allocation to the General Fund of $129,500, payment of $3,070 to the Technology Replacement Fund, $948 to the Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance Trust, as well as a payment of $1,388,800 to the Water Fund and $1,260,896 to the Wastewater Fund to reflect contributions to reclaimed capital costs. Year-to-date Operating Revenues are 113% of budget compared to 97% for FY 2023-24, while Operating Expenses are 100% of budget as compared to 99% for FY 2023-24. This results in a positive performance indicator. Solid Waste Fund Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison Solid Waste Fund Analysis Revenues $ Total Revenues Operating Expenses FY 25 Actual % of Budget % of Revenue/ Rec'd/Exp'd Budget Budget Exp+Enc to Date Prior Yr. 19,712,816 20,886,864 106% 104% $ 19,712,816 $ 20,886,864 106% 104% $ $ 17,688,519 88% 94% 20,117,322 $ Major Capital Expenses 5,753,482 2,946,508 51% 23% Transfers Out 1,345,520 1,370,991 102% 100% Total Expenses $ 27,216,324 $ 22,006,018 81% 78% Net Rev / Exp $ Positive (7,503,508) $ Revenues 24 21 18 15 12 9 6 3 FY 24 Actual Q4 (1,119,154) Expenses 27 Dollars in Millions Solid Waste FY 25 Adjusted FY 25 Actual Q4 FY 25 Budget The performance indicator for Enterprise Funds focuses on the relationship between Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses (including debt service and indirect cost allocation) and the percentage of budget received/expended. The Solid Waste Operating Fund supports operating functions and major capital costs that can be paid without borrowing. The Net Revenue/Expense for FY 2024-25 reflects a drawdown of $7.5M (including unspent capital carryforward from prior years). The budgeted Transfers Out totaling $1,345,520 include an indirect cost allocation to the General Fund of $1,261,500, payment of $67,985 to the Technology Replacement Fund, and payment of $16,035 to the Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance Trust. Year-to-date Operating Revenues are 106% compared to 104% for FY 2023-24, while Operating Expenses are 88% compared to 94% for FY 2023-24. This results in a positive performance indicator. 18 9/19/2025 Enterprise / Other Funds Enterprise / Other Funds Analysis (continued): Airport Fund Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison Revenues $ General Fund Subsidy Total Revenues $ Operating Expenses $ Major Capital Expenses Transfers Out Total Expenses $ Net Rev / Exp $ Positive FY 25 Actual % of Budget % of Adjusted Revenue/ Rec'd/Exp'd Budget Budget Exp+Enc to Date Prior Yr. 1,217,988 $ 1,309,148 107% 128% 13,423,750 1,930,086 14% 11% $ 3,239,233 22% 18% 1,659,755 $ 1,586,299 96% 96% 12,866,659 1,600,954 12% 14% 115,324 115,324 100% 100% $ 3,302,577 23% 24% $ (63,344) 14,641,738 14,641,738 - Airport Fund Analysis Revenues Expenses 16,000 Dollars in Thousands Airport Fund FY 25 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 FY 24 Actual Q4 FY 25 Actual Q4 FY 24 Budget The performance indicator for Enterprise Funds focuses on the relationship between Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses (including debt service and indirect cost allocation) and the percentage of budget received/expended. The Airport Fund supports operating functions and major capital costs that can be paid without borrowing. The Net Revenue/Expense for FY 2024-25 reflects no budgeted change in fund balance since the General Fund Subsidy of $13.4M is budgeted from the General Fund to make up the funding needed to support operations and/or major capital expenses. The budgeted Transfers Out totaling $115,324 includes indirect cost allocation to the General Fund of $100,000 and a payment of $15,324 to the Technology Replacement Fund. Year-to-date Operating Revenues are 107% of budget compared to 128% for FY 2023-24, while year-to-date Operating Expenses are 96% of budget compared to 96% for FY 2023-24. This results in a positive performance indicator. Highway User Fund (HURF) Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison $ Other FY 25 Actual % of Budget % of Adjusted Revenue/ Rec'd/Exp'd Budget Budget Exp+Enc to Date Prior Yr. 17,000,000 $ 21,880,284 129% 126% 669,000 1,767,602 264% 174% Total Revenues $ 17,669,000 $ 23,647,886 134% 81% Operating Expenses $ 10,628,871 $ 9,808,767 92% 92% 17,334,017 15,506,257 89% 92% 133,747 133,747 100% 100% 91% 87% Major Capital Expenses Transfers Out Total Expenses Net Rev / Exp Positive $ 28,096,635 $ 25,448,771 $ (10,427,635) $ (1,800,884) Highway User Fund Analysis Revenues Dollars in Millions Highway Users Tax FY 25 Expenses 30 27 24 21 18 15 12 9 6 3 0 FY 24 Actual Q4 FY 25 Actual Q4 FY 24 Budget The performance indicator for this Special Revenue Fund focuses on the relationship between Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses (including debt service) and the percentage of budget received/expended. Highway Users Tax is collected by the state on all gasoline sales. It is combined with other state-level vehicle related revenues, and distributed to cities and towns by using two formulas based upon population. Funds are restricted for use on streets and related projects. The Net Revenue/Expense for FY 2024-25 reflects a drawdown of $10.4M (including unspent capital carryforward from prior years). The budgeted Transfers Out totaling $133,747 include a payment to the General Fund of $2,082 for miscellaneous charges, a payment of $26,583 to the Technology Replacement Fund, and a payment of $105,082 to the Uninsured Liability Self-Insurance Fund for stormwater oversight. Year-to-date Operating Revenues are 129% of budget compared to 126% for FY 2023-24, while year-to-date Operating Expenses are 92% of budget compared to 92% for FY 2023-24. This results in a positive performance indicator. 19 9/19/2025 Other Funds Other Funds Analysis (continued): Enterprise System Development Fee Funds Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison FY 25 FY 25 % of Budget Development Fee Adjusted Actual Rec'd to Budget Revenue Date (SDF) Funds Water $ Reclaimed Water Wastewater Total SDF Revenue $ 3,594,000 $ 2,861,362 80% 890,300 759,547 85% 3,293,000 3,229,464 98% 6,850,373 88% 7,777,300 $ 10 Dollars in Millions Enterprise System Note: Budget and Actual amounts reflect SDF revenues and the interest earned FY 24 Adjusted Budget FY 25 Adjusted Budget FY 24 Actual FY 25 Actual 8 6 4 2 0 on fund balances, and excludes loan transfers in/out or proceeds from bond Water sales. Reclaimed Water Wastewater Enterprise (Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed Water) System Development Fees (SDFs) are assessed on building permits based on the meter size. Enterprise SDF's are assessed on all residential, but may or may not be assessed on Commercial. Commercial properties are assessed if a Water Meter Permit (WMI) is needed. Enterprise SDFs are based on development and fluctuate quarterly as well as from year to year. The graph shows the FY 2024-25 budget and year-to-date collections compared to the FY 2023-24 budget and year-to-date collections. Actual collections for FY 2024-25 were 88% of the budget as compared to the prior year's collections of 35% of the budget. General System Development Fee Funds Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison General System FY 25 FY 25 % of Budget Development Fee Adjusted Actual Rec'd to Budget Revenue Date Arterial Streets $ 3,495,689 90% 557,000 270,770 49% Library - 12,571 0% Parks 902,000 1,871,023 207% Police 312,000 126,351 40% Public Building 277,000 115,837 42% 5,892,241 99% Fire Total SDF Revenue $ 5,924,000 $ FY 25 Adjusted Budget FY 24 Actual FY 25 Actual 8,000 3,876,000 $ Dollars in Thousands (SDF) Funds FY 24 Adjusted Budget 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Arterial Streets Note: Budget and Actual amounts reflect Impact Fee revenues and the interest earned on fund balances, and excludes loan transfers in/out or proceeds from Fire Library Parks Police Public Building bond sales. General (Arterial Streets, Fire, Library, Parks, Police, and Public Building) System Development Fees (SDFs) are charged on all commercial and residential building permits and is based on square footage and land use. General SDF fees are based on development and will fluctuate quarterly as well as annually. The graph shows the FY 2024-25 budget and year-to-date collections compared to the FY 2023-24 budget and year-to-date collections. Actuals collections for FY 2024-25 were 99% of the budget as compared to the prior year's collections of 45% of the budget. 20 9/19/2025 Other Funds Other Funds Analysis (continued): Grant Funds Analysis FY 2024-25 Comparison Operating Grant Revenues $ FY 24 Actual Actual Revenue Revenue 576,755 $ FY 24 Actual Revenue 20 18 Community Services 288,847 263,819 Neighborhood Resources 405,456 653,921 Neighborhood Res. - CDBG & HOME 1,731,664 1,650,806 Neighborhood Res. - HUD 22,144,684 15,122,598 Public Safety 767,748 2,346,842 Public Works & Utilities 919,889 141,278 Total Operating Grant Revenue $ 26,835,043 $ 28,056,181 General Government* $ 4,344,399 $ 2,104,000 Community Services - 1,389,182 Cultural Development 244,913 Public Works & Utilities 10,723,369 FY 25 Actual Revenue 22 7,876,917 16 14 Millions General Government* FY 25 12 10 8 6 4 2 - 7,862,976 Total Capital Grant Revenue $ 15,312,681 $ 12,036,158 Total Grant Revenue $ 42,147,724 $ 40,092,338 * Includes Airport, CAPA, City Manager, Economic Development, Law, Magistrate, Transportation Policy, and Non-Departmental non-entitlement programs. Grants are an additional source of funds for major capital projects and certain operating programs. Grant sources include federal, state, and county governments as well as donations from businesses, organizations, or individuals to support particular programs. In most cases, grant revenues for many programs are received on a reimbursable basis, so the revenue on a large capital project may lag a fiscal year after the project is initiated. The Federal Grant changes that continue to be proposed will impact some categories and is being monitored. Actual collections for FY 2024-25 were $42.1M as compared to $40.1M as collected for FY 2023-24. 21 9/19/2025