DOCSLIB.ORG

Yavapai County June 30, 2010 Financial Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Yavapai County June 30, 2010 Financial Report Yavapai County, Arizona Yavapai County Superior Court 2840 Commonwealth Drive Camp Verde, Arizona November 2009 Completion Date Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010 Yavapai County, Arizona Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010 Board of Supervisors Carol Springer, District 1 A.G. “Chip” Davis, District 3 Thomas Thurman, District 2 Prepared by Yavapai County Finance Department YAVAPAI COUNTY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended June 30, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letter of Transmittal 1 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting 6 Organizational Chart 7 Yavapai County Officials 8 FINANCIAL SECTION Independent Auditor's Report 9 Management's Discussion and Analysis (Required Supplementary Information) 11 BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: Government-Wide Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets 22 Statement of Activities 23 Fund Financial Statements: Balance Sheet-Governmental Funds 24 Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Statement of Net Assets 26 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances-Governmental Funds 28 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities 30 Statement of Net Assets-Proprietary Funds 31 Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Assets- Proprietary Funds 32 Statement of Cash Flows-Proprietary Funds 33 Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets-Fiduciary Funds 34 Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Assets-Fiduciary Funds 35 Notes to the Financial Statements: Note 1 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies 36 Note 2 - Beginning Balances Restated 42 Note 3 - Deposits and Investments 43 Note 4 - Due From Other Governments 45 Note 5 - Capital Assets 46 Note 6 - Construction Commitments 47 Note 7 - Long-Term Liabilities 47 Note 8 - Risk Management 51 Note 9 - Pensions and Other Postemployment Benefits 52 Note 10 - Interfund Balances and Activity 56 Note 11 - County Treasurer's Investment Pool 57 i YAVAPAI COUNTY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended June 30, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Required Supplementary Information: Budgetary Comparison Schedules: General Fund 59 Jail District Fund 61 Regional Road Fund 62 HURF Road Fund 63 Notes to Budgetary Comparison Schedules 64 Schedule of Agent Retirement Plans' Funding Progress 65 Combining and Individual Fund Statements and Schedules: Combining Balance Sheet-Nonmajor Governmental Funds 68 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances-Nonmajor Governmental Funds 74 Schedules of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual: Jail District Debt Service 80 Regional Road Debt Service 81 Capital Projects 82 Capital Projects Debt Service 83 Health Care 84 Recorder's Surcharge 85 Assessor's Surcharge 86 Treasurer’s Surcharge 87 Election 88 Public Library 89 Education Service Agency 90 Parks & Recreation 91 Water Advisory Committee 92 Landfill / Environment 93 Public Works 94 Finance 95 Improvement Districts 96 Clerk of Superior Court 97 County Attorney 98 Law Enforcement 99 Emergency Management 100 Probation 101 Courts 102 Public Defender 103 Airport Development 104 Coyote Springs 105 Prescott East 106 Poquito Valley 107 ii YAVAPAI COUNTY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended June 30, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds: Comparative Schedules By Source 109 Schedule By Function and Activity 110 Schedule of Changes By Function and Activity 111 Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities-Agency Fund 112 STATISTICAL SECTION Financial Trends Net Assets by Component 114 Changes in Net Assets 116 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 118 Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 119 Revenue Capacity Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property 120 Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates 121 Principal Property Taxpayers 122 Property Tax Levies and Collections 123 Debt Capacity Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type 124 Legal Debt Margin Information 125 Pledged Revenue Coverage 126 Demographic and Economic Information Demographic and Economic Statistics 127 Principal Employers 128 Operating Information Full-Time Equivalent Employees by Function 129 Operating Indicators by Function 130 Capital Asset Statistics by Function 131 iii This page is left blank intentionally. iv INTRODUCTORY SECTION Yavapai County Finance Department JOHN D. ZANDER, CPA FINANCE DIRECTOR December 6, 2010 To the Board of Supervisors, and Citizens of Yavapai County: State law requires that counties prepare a complete set of financial statements presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards by the Arizona State Auditor General’s Office or by a firm of licensed certified public accountants. Pursuant to that requirement, we hereby issue the comprehensive annual financial report of Yavapai County for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010. This report consists of management’s representations concerning the finances of Yavapai County. Consequently, management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of all of the information presented in this report. To provide a reasonable basis for making these representations, management of the County has established a comprehensive internal control framework that is designed both to protect the government’s assets from loss, theft, or misuse and to compile sufficient reliable information for the preparation of the County’s financial statements in conformity with GAAP. Because the cost of internal controls should not outweigh their benefits, the County’s comprehensive framework of internal controls has been designed to provide reasonable rather than absolute assurance that the financial statements will be free from material misstatement. As management, we assert that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, this financial report is complete and reliable in all material respects. Walker & Armstrong LLP, a firm of licensed certified public accountants, have audited the County’s financial statements. The goal of the independent audit was to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements of the County for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, are free of material misstatement. The independent audit involved examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management; and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. The independent auditor concluded, based upon the audit; that there was a reasonable basis for rendering an unqualified opinion that Yavapai County’s financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, are fairly presented in conformity with GAAP. The independent auditor’s report is presented as the first component of the financial section of this report. 1 The independent audit of the financial statements of the County was part of a broader, federally mandated “Single Audit” designed to meet the special needs of federal grantor agencies. The standards governing Single Audit engagements require the independent auditor to report not only on the fair presentation of the financial statements, but also on the audited government’s internal controls and compliance with legal requirements, with special emphasis on internal controls and legal requirements involving the administration of federal awards. These reports are available in the County’s separately issued Single Audit report. GAAP require that management provide a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis to accompany the basic financial statements in the form of Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A). This letter of transmittal is designed to complement the MD&A and should be read in conjunction with it. The County’s MD&A can be found immediately following the report of the independent auditors. Profile of the Government Yavapai County was formed in 1864; one year after the Arizona Territory was established. The County was named after the Yavapai tribe, whose name means “people of the sun”. The County is located in the central portion of the state encompassing approximately 8,125 square miles. The County is empowered to levy a property tax on both real and personal properties within its boundaries. The County operates under the supervisor-administrator form of government. Policy- making and legislative authority are vested in a Board of Supervisors (Board) consisting of three members elected to four-year terms representing three supervisorial districts. The Board appoints an Administrator, who is responsible for overseeing the day-to-day operations of the County government. The Board is responsible for the financing and administration of County government, has final approval over County departmental budgets and sets property tax rates. As part of its administrative duties, the Board is responsible for appointing department heads, and members of County boards and commissions dealing with planning and zoning, building codes, health, employees and employee benefits, private industry and agriculture. The Board acts as the board of directors for special districts within the County such as jail, water, sanitation, lighting, flood control and library. The County Administrator develops and presents the County budget, oversees countywide
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Apache and Navajo Counties Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2013
    The Apache and Navajo Counties Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2013 Photograph by B. Sitko, AGFD Arizona Game and Fish Department In partnership with The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................................................................... ii RECOMMENDED CITATION ............................................................................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................................................................................................... iii DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................................................................ iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 THE APACHE AND NAVAJO COUNTIES WILDLIFE CONNECTIVITY ASSESSMENT
    [Show full text]
  • General Plan Update 2014 - 2024 Town of Payson, Arizona
    [PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] General Plan Update 2014 - 2024 Town of Payson, Arizona PROJECT TEAM ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Payson Town Council: Planning & Zoning Commission: Kenny Evans, Mayor Jeff Loyd, Chairman Michael Hughes, Vice Mayor John Swenson, Vice Chairman John Wilson, Council Member Dan Jaeger, Commissioner Ed Blair, Council Member Clark Jones, Commissioner Su Connell, Council Member Lori Meyers, Commissioner Fred Carpenter, Council Member James Scheidt, Commissioner Rick Croy, Council Member Mark Waldrop, Commissioner General Plan Steering Committee Joel Mona Barbara Underwood Ron Hitchcock Ralph Bossert Kayla Percell Emily DePugh Jeff Loyd Joel Goode Rob Ingram Robert Sanders Sharon King John Wakelin Jim Hunt Staff Participants: Debra Galbraith, Town Manager LaRon Garrett, Assistant Town Manager Sheila DeSchaaf, Zoning Administrator Donald Engler, Chief of Police Cameron Davis, Chris Floyd, Parks, Recreation & Tourism Director Executive Assistant Community Development Doni Wilbanks, Planning Technician Citizen Participants: As part of the General Plan Update 2014-2024 process, the Town of Payson engaged citizen participation through an online survey, workshops, an information forum, and access to Town staff and officials. Over 775 Payson citizens and stakeholders participated in the yearlong Update process. Consultants: TischlerBise was retained by the Town of Payson to deliver a General Plan Update 2014-2024. The findings and conclusions in this analysis are the culmination of data collection, research, and stakeholder input.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Infrastructure Design for Transport Projects: a Road Map To
    GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN FOR TRANSPORT PROJECTS A ROAD MAP TO PROTECTING ASIA’S WILDLIFE BIODIVERSITY DECEMBER 2019 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN FOR TRANSPORT PROJECTS A ROAD MAP TO PROTECTING ASIA’S WILDLIFE BIODIVERSITY DECEMBER 2019 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) © 2019 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 8632 4444; Fax +63 2 8636 2444 www.adb.org Some rights reserved. Published in 2019. ISBN 978-92-9261-991-6 (print), 978-92-9261-992-3 (electronic) Publication Stock No. TCS189222 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22617/TCS189222 The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by ADB in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term “country” in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/.
    [Show full text]
  • State Route 260 Little Colorado River Bridge Scour Retrofit Project FHWA File # 260-C(204)T ADOT File # 260-AP-394-H8269-01C
    United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Office 9828 North 31st Avenue, Suite C3 Phoenix, Arizona 85051 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 Fax: (602) 242-2513 In reply refer to: 02EAAZ00-2015-F-0270 June 3, 2019 Mr. Joshua Fife, Biology Team Lead Arizona Department of Transportation Environmental Planning 1611 West Jackson Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007 RE: State Route 260 Little Colorado River Bridge Scour Retrofit Project FHWA File # 260-C(204)T ADOT File # 260-AP-394-H8269-01C Dear Mr. Fife: Thank you for your June 12, 2018, request for formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. § 1531-1544), as amended (Act). Your request was dated June 12, 2018, and was received by us via electronic mail (email) on the same day. At issue are effects that may result from a proposed scour retrofit and culvert extension project at the Little Colorado River (LCR) bridge on State Route (SR) 260 (hereafter the LCR bridge) within the town of Eagar, Apache County, Arizona. The proposed action may affect the threatened Little Colorado spinedace (Lepidomeda vittata) (spinedace). Below we provide a biological opinion (BO) on effects of the proposed action on the spinedace. In your letter, you requested our concurrence that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) (flycatcher) and endangered New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius luteus) (jumping mouse). We concur with your determinations for the flycatcher and jumping mouse and provide our rationales in Appendix A.
    [Show full text]
  • SR 260 – Payson to Heber Archaeological Project: Results of Archaeological Testing and a Plan for Data Recovery in the Doubtful Canyon Segment
    SR 260 – Payson to Heber Archaeological Project: Results of Archaeological Testing and a Plan for Data Recovery in the Doubtful Canyon Segment Sarah H. Herr Pat H. Stein Technical Report No. 2009-09 Desert Archaeology, Inc. SR 260 – Payson to Heber Archaeological Project: Results of Archaeological Testing and a Plan for Data Recovery in the Doubtful Canyon Segment DRAFT Project Number: STP-053-2 (38) Sarah H. Herr TRACS Number: 260 GI 269 H4698 01C Pat H. Stein Contract Number: 99-59 Submitted to Historic Preservation Team Environmental and Enhancement Group Arizona Department of Transportation 205 South 17th Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Technical Report No. 2009-09 Desert Archaeology, Inc. 3975 North Tucson Boulevard, Tucson, Arizona 85716 • December 2009 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY Date: 18 December 2009 Report Title: SR 260 – Payson to Heber Archaeological Project: Results of Archaeological Testing and a Plan for Data Recovery in the Doubtful Canyon Segment. Technical Report Number 2009-09. Client: Arizona Department of Transportation Client Project Name: State Route 260 – Payson to Heber project Compliance Agency: Tonto National Forest, Arizona Department of Transportation Compliance Level: Federal ADOT TRACS Number: 260 GI 269 H4698 01C Applicable Laws/Regulations: Arizona Antiquities Act, ARS §41-841; Federal Organic Administration Act of June 4, 1897; Antiquities Act of 1906, As Amended; Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, As Amended; National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 106; Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) Applicable Permits: TNF permit TON426 for prehistoric period sites; TNF permit TON425 for historic sites; TNF permit TON570 for survey work. Arizona Antiquties Act Project Specific Permit 1999-121ps Tribal Consultation: When working on Tonto National Forest land the State Route 260 project works under the Plan for the Treatment and Disposition of Human Remains and Other Cultural Items from the Tonto National Forest pursuant to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (Revised 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • CX Appendix C Burro Movem
    1 B. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 2 Name and Address of Applicant or Applicant Organization: 3 Arizona Game and Fish Department 4 5000 W. Carefree Highway 5 Phoenix, AZ 85086 6 Evaluation of Burro Movements and Collisions along Roads Near Lake Pleasant 7 Herd Management Area 8 With burro populations above acceptable Herd Management Area (HMA) levels, burro- 9 vehicle collisions (BVC) have become an increasing problem for the travelling public on 10 roads in proximity to Lake Pleasant (LP) HMA. BVC in and around the LPHMA have 11 increased dramatically and exceeded 35 between October 1, 2015 and December 7, 12 2015, and will continue to pose a hazard to motorists. The Bureau of Land Management 13 (BLM) and its partners are seeking solutions to return the population to acceptable HMA 14 levels. Current BLM burro removal efforts cannot keep pace with the herd’s population 15 growth. Until long-term burro reduction strategies are implemented, there is an ever 16 increasing risk to the safety of both motorists and burros. The Arizona Department of 17 Transportation (ADOT) shoulders a bulk of the liability associated with BVCs. To help 18 mitigate risks to motorists and burros, an evaluation of burro movements and collision 19 locations is warranted. We propose to gather information on burro movements along 20 roads within and adjacent to LPHMA through the collection of 1) GPS movement data, 21 2) BVC hotspots and associated variables, and 3) burro roadway access point camera 22 data collection. Our analysis of this Information will 1) provide recommendations for 23 strategic reduction in BVCs while considering implications to wildlife connectivity and 2) 24 identify additional areas for burro removal efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • General Plan Update 2014 - 2024 Town of Payson, Arizona
    [PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] General Plan Update 2014 - 2024 Town of Payson, Arizona PROJECT TEAM ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Payson Town Council: Planning & Zoning Commission: Kenny Evans, Mayor Jeff Loyd, Chairman Michael Hughes, Vice Mayor John Swenson, Vice Chairman John Wilson, Council Member Dan Jaeger, Commissioner Ed Blair, Council Member Clark Jones, Commissioner Su Connell, Council Member Lori Meyers, Commissioner Fred Carpenter, Council Member James Scheidt, Commissioner Rick Croy, Council Member Mark Waldrop, Commissioner General Plan Steering Committee Joel Mona Barbara Underwood Ron Hitchcock Ralph Bossert Kayla Percell Emily DePugh Jeff Loyd Joel Goode Rob Ingram Robert Sanders Sharon King John Wakelin Jim Hunt Staff Participants: Debra Galbraith, Town Manager LaRon Garrett, Assistant Town Manager Sheila DeSchaaf, Zoning Administrator Donald Engler, Chief of Police Cameron Davis, Chris Floyd, Parks, Recreation & Tourism Director Executive Assistant Community Development Doni Wilbanks, Planning Technician Citizen Participants: As part of the General Plan Update 2014-2024 process, the Town of Payson engaged citizen participation through an online survey, workshops, an information forum, and access to Town staff and officials. Over 775 Payson citizens and stakeholders participated in the yearlong Update process. Consultants: TischlerBise was retained by the Town of Payson to deliver a General Plan Update 2014-2024. The findings and conclusions in this analysis are the culmination of data collection, research, and stakeholder input.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior U.S
    United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 FAX: (602) 242-2513 AESO/SE 2-21-90-F-299-R1 May 23, 2001 Mr. Robert E. Hollis, Division Administrator U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Arizona Division 234 North Central Avenue, Suite 330 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Dear Mr. Hollis: This reinitiated biological opinion responds to your request for consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), as amended (Act). Your request for reinitiation of formal consultation was dated April 2, 2001, and received by us on April 2, 2001. At issue are impacts that may result from use of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) funds for proposed construction of the Christopher Creek and Kohls Ranch segments of Arizona Department of Transportation’s (ADOT) State Route (SR) 260 improvements from Payson to Heber, Gila and Navajo counties, Arizona. FHWA/ADOT proposes to widen from 2 to 4 lanes and make other improvements to 7.6 miles of SR 260. Impacts resulting from the project may affect the following listed species: Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida) (threatened), spikedace (Meda fulgida) (threatened), loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) (threatened); and may also affect one species proposed for listing as threatened, the Chiricahua leopard frog (Rana chiricahuensis). We concur that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect the latter three species. The basis for our conclusion is provided in Appendix 1 of this biological opinion.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Department of Transportation
    ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS SPECIAL PROVISIONS BIDDERS DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY: ________________________________________________________________ (Company or Firm Name) ________________________________________________________________ (Mailing Address) ________________________________________________________________ (City) (State) (Zip Code) ________________________________________________________________ (Street Address - If Different From Above) ________________________________________________________________ (City) (State) (Zip Code) Arizona Commercial License No. _________________________________________ License Classifications(s) _______________________________________________________ TRACS/Proj. No.: 260 AP 394 H826901C STBG-260-C(204)T SHOW LOW-MCNARY-EAGAR HIGHWAY (SR 260) (LITTLE COLORADO RIVER BRIDGE, STR #416) Contracts and Specifications Section 1651 West Jackson, Room 121F Phoenix, Arizona 85007-3217 ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS BID OPENING: FRIDAY, MAY 15, 2020, AT 11 :00 A.M. (M.S.T.) TRACS NO 260 AP 394 H826901C PROJECT NO STBG-260-C(204 )T TERMINI SHOW LOW-McNARY-EAGAR HIGHWAY (SR 260) LOCATION LITTLE COLORADO RIVER BRIDGE, STA. # 416 ROUTE NO. MILEPOST DISTRICT ITEM NO. SR 260 394.68 to 394.78 Northeast 14517 The amount programmed for this contract is $700,000. The location and description of the proposed work are as follows: The proposed work is located in Apache County on SR 260 at Milepost 394.75, one mile west of the Town of Eagar. The work consists of constructing a new scour concrete floor underneath the existing bridge and repairing pier stem walls. The work also includes box culvert extension, shotcrete, pavement marking, signing, and other related work. The work included in this contract shall be completed by February 1, 2021. The Arizona Department of Transportation, in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat.
    [Show full text]
  • Yavapai County June 30, 2011 Financial Report
    Yavapai County, Arizona Yavapai County Courthouse Prescott, Arizona Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 Yavapai County, Arizona Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 Board of Supervisors Carol Springer, District 1 A.G. “Chip” Davis, District 3 Thomas Thurman, District 2 Prepared by Yavapai County Finance Department YAVAPAI COUNTY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended June 30, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letter of Transmittal 1 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting 6 Organizational Chart 7 Yavapai County Officials 8 FINANCIAL SECTION Independent Auditors' Report 9 Management's Discussion and Analysis (Required Supplementary Information) 11 BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: Government-Wide Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets 22 Statement of Activities 23 Fund Financial Statements: Balance Sheet-Governmental Funds 24 Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Statement of Net Assets 26 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances-Governmental Funds 28 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities 30 Statement of Net Assets-Proprietary Funds 31 Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Assets- Proprietary Funds 32 Statement of Cash Flows-Proprietary Funds 33 Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets-Fiduciary Funds 34 Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Assets-Fiduciary Funds
    [Show full text]
  • The Coconino County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input March 2011
    The Coconino County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input March 2011 Photo by G. Andrejko, AGFD Arizona Game and Fish Department In partnership with Coconino County and the Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup 1 Recommended citation: Arizona Game and Fish Department. 2011. The Coconino County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input. 2 Acknowledgments: This project would not have been possible without the contributions of the individuals and organizations listed below, to whom we extend our sincere appreciation. Stakeholders: Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs/Camp Navajo, Arizona Department of Transportation, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Arizona Public Service, Arizona State Forestry, AZTEC Engineering, City of Flagstaff, Coconino County - Community Development, Parks and Recreation, and Public Works Departments, Coconino National Forest, Defenders of Wildlife, El Paso Natural Gas, Energy Transfer Company, Flagstaff Regional Plan Citizens’ Advisory Committee, Grand Canyon Trust, Grand Canyon Wildlands Council, Habitat Harmony, Hopi Nation, Jenness Enterprises, Kaibab National Forest, National Park Service - Flagstaff Area National Monuments and Grand Canyon National Park, Northern Arizona Audubon Society, Northern Arizona University, Oak Creek Canyon Task Force, The Nature Conservancy, US Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration, US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Geological Survey, Verde Valley Land Preservation Institute Partners: Arizona Wildlife Linkages
    [Show full text]
  • Pima County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Detailed Linkages
    August 2012 Pima County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Detailed Linkages Kitt Peak Linkage Design Towards Kitt Peak Photo courtesy George Andrejko, AGFD Arizona Game and Fish Department Regional Transportation Authority of Pima County Kitt Peak Linkage Design Recommended Citation Arizona Game and Fish Department. 2012. Pima County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Detailed Linkages. Kitt Peak Linkage Design. Report to the Regional Transportation Authority of Pima County. ii Pima County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Detailed Linkages Kitt Peak Linkage Design Acknowledgments This project would not have been possible without the help of many individuals. We would like to thank the following: CorridorDesign Team at Northern Arizona University: Paul Beier, Emily Garding, Jeff Jenness, and Dan Majka (CorridorDesign Team) for authoring the Arizona Missing Linkages. Content from the Arizona Missing Linkages (Beier et al 2006a, Beier et al 2006b), is used directly throughout this report with permission. Models in this report were created using methods developed by Majka et al. (2007). Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup: Arizona Department of Transportation, Arizona Game and Fish Department, AZTEC Engineering, Bureau of Land Management, Defenders of Wildlife, Northern Arizona University, Sky Island Alliance, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service Pima County Wildlife Connectivity Workgroup: Arizona Game and Fish Department, Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection, Defenders of Wildlife, Pima County, Sky Island Alliance, Town of Marana, Tucson Audubon Society, University of Arizona, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Transportation Authority of Pima County: The Regional Transportation Authority of Pima County for funding the Pima County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment project, which this report is part of.
    [Show full text]