Sheila Cumberland, City of Ceres, asked: What is the GASB 34 implementation date for her city? (Population 33,000). CSMFO Members: If you aren't interested in the answer to this question, stop reading now and delete this message. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheila: This is a simple (and excellent) question with a not so-simple answer: it depends . . . . It depends on your total revenues (not population) and fiscal year period. The following summarizes the deadlines, but earlier application is encouraged (yeah, right). Assuming a fiscal year ending date of June 30, I've put the fiscal year it applies to in parenthesis. o Phase 1 Governments - total revenues of $100 million or more: Fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2001 (2001-02). o Phase 2 Governments - total revenues of $10 million or more but less than $100 million: Fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2002 (2002-03). o Phase 3 Governments - total revenues less than $10 million: Fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2003 (2003-04). BUT: These are the deadlines for the new "model" and "prospective" reporting of infrastructure. Retroactive reporting of infrastructure is not required for 4 years after the implementation date for "phase 1 and 2" governments - and not at all for "phase 3" governments. (See paragraphs 142 to 148 of GASB Statement No. 34 for more information on effective dates). So, Sheila - the short answer to your question is: by 2002-03. This is based on information for the City of Ceres in the State Controller's Report for 1996-97, which showed total revenues for your city of $15,059,827. This means you're a "phase 2" government (same as the City of San Luis Obispo - and most other cities in California, I would guess). So, assuming your fiscal year starts July 1, you'll have to comply with the new model and prospective infrastructure requirements by FY 2002-03; and retroactively report infrastructure by FY 2006-07. This means you have about 3 years to implement the new model. Given the major changes you'll need to make, this is not really a lot of time. And don't be too sanguine about the extra 4 years to retroactively report infrastructure. Any city that used debt before the effective date (including lease-purchase type agreements or COP's) that will be paid from governmental fund-type resources in order to finance infrastructure improvements will want to report these assets when they implement the new model. Otherwise, since the debt will no longer be shown in the "general long term debt" account group, they will now have a large liability with no corresponding, off-setting asset. But that's another story . . . . Sheila: I hope this was helpful. (And that others benefitted from the answer to your question.) PS: If you want to order a copy of GASB Statement No. 34, you can do this from GASB's web site (which also has other cool stuff on it . . . well, as cool as governmental accounting stuff can be, anyway): www.rutgers.edu/Accounting/raw/gasb - Bill >>> "Sheila Cumberland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 4/7/00 8:23:28 AM >>> Bill, thanks for the information. I appreciate the updates. One thing I haven't seen recently is the implementation deadlines. I thought it was 2002 for a City our size (33,000), but my engineer said he thought it was later. Can you tell me the deadline for a City with a population of 33,000? Thanks again! ~~~~ Sheila Cumberland Director of Finance City of Ceres 209-538-5764 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ci.ceres.ca.us
