X00A00
Public Debt
Operating Budget Data
($ in Thousands)
FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 % Change
Actual Working Allowance Change Prior Year
General Funds $103,455 $94,020 $82,100 $-11,920 -12.7%
Special Funds 408,815 632,263 340,584 -291,680 -46.1%
Reimbursable Funds 100,523 89,862 104,910 15,047 16.7%
Total Funds $612,792 $816,146 $527,593 -$288,552 -35.4%
ÄÃ The allowance for the Annuity Bond Fund is $288.6 million less than the fiscal 2003 working
appropriation. The decline is due primarily to an accounting transaction that recognized for fiscal
2003 the $315 million in special funds derived from the State refunding bonds.
ÄÃ Despite the 35% decline in the fiscal 2004 allowance when compared to fiscal 2003, debt service costs
increases by 6.1% or $30.3 million over fiscal 2003.
ÄÃ General funds for debt service payment increase a total of $3.1 million or 1.7% over fiscal 2003 to
$187 million. These general funds include both the funds credited directly to the Annuity Bond Fund
and those budgeted in the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) and received as
reimbursable funds. General funds, both in fiscal 2003 and 2004, are substantially lower than the fiscal
2002 actual due to the State’s receipt of large premium payments in the bond sales occurring in 2001
and 2002. Also, reducing the growth in general funds is an increase in property tax receipts ($18.6
million or 6.6% over fiscal 2003).
ÄÃ The fiscal 2004 allowance does not provide funds for the remittance of arbitrage earnings and
penalties. The fiscal 2003 working appropriation includes $3.5 million for that purpose.
Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding.
For further information contact: Terri Bacote-Charles Phone: (410) 946-5530
1
X00A00 - Public Debt
Analysis in Brief
Issues
Altering the Accounting for General Obligation Bond Proceeds: Legislation introduced this session
seeks to alter the accounting method for general obligation bond proceeds. The new method is expected
to minimize federal rebate liability. The fiscal 2004 allowance does not provide funds for the remittance of
arbitrage or tax rebate penalties. The State’s Treasurer’s Office should brief the committees on the
pending legislation and address the potential for an unfunded liability.
Annuity Bond Fund Projections: A review of the projected activity in the Annuity Bond Fund from
fiscal 2004 through 2008 reveals that the growth rate for debt service payments outpaces its supporting
revenues. Moreover, the debt service projections show a growing reliance on the increasingly competitive
general funds. These factors signal a need to review the current State policy to maintain a stable property
tax rate. The Department of Legislative Services recommends a statutory change to cap the general
funds credited to the Annuity Bond Fund at 2% of the estimated general fund revenues for that
year.
State’s Deficit Creates General Fund Premium – Property Tax and Other Special Funds for Debt
Service: The State’s deficit places a premium on all general fund expenditures. Debt service payments
have a dedicated revenue source that allows for the annual alignment of the estimated expenditure to
revenue generation. The Department of Legislative Services recommends that the fiscal 2004 debt
service payment be derived solely from special fund revenue sources including property tax receipts
and bond premiums.
Recommended Actions
1. Add contingent reduction language to reduce the general funds
for debt service.
Updates
Public Bond Market Could Be Impacted by the Proposed Tax Plan: Within President’s Bush tax
proposal is a provision that would create a disincentive for corporations to invest in municipal bonds.
2
X00A00
Public Debt
Operating Budget Analysis
Program Description
The Annuity Bond Fund provides for debt service payments on the State’s general obligation bond
debt. Funds for this purpose are provided from property tax revenues, general funds, and repayments from
certain State agencies, subdivisions, and private organizations. General fund appropriations to the Annuity
Bond Fund allow the property tax rate to be lower than it otherwise would be since the property tax is the
dedicated source of revenue the State pledges to pay debt service. General funds to pay debt service on
public school construction loans are also appropriated to the Maryland State Department of Education
(MSDE) and credited to this program as reimbursable funds.
Since fiscal 1996, bond discount and penalty and rebate expenses have been budgeted in a program
separate from that which pays debt service. This program also contains the budgeted special funds
resulting from refunded bonds. The funds are used to purchase government securities that provide the debt
service payment to the bondholders.
Governor s Proposed Budget
The fiscal 2004 allowance of $527.6 million represents a decrease of $288.6 million (35.4%) below the
fiscal 2003 working appropriation. The decline is due primarily to an accounting transaction that
recognized in fiscal 2003 the $315 million in special funds derived from the State refunding bonds. These
proceeds were brought in through a budget amendment that authorized the purchase of securities to pay
the bondholders upon maturity.
Despite the appearance of a decline in the fiscal 2004 allowance, debt service payment increases by
6.1% or $30.3 million over fiscal 2003. Debt service is estimated to be $527.6 million in fiscal 2004. In
contrast, the related expenses on State bonds are budgeted to decline. The fiscal 2004 allowance does not
include funds for the remittance of arbitrage earnings whereas $3.5 million was provided in fiscal 2003.
The arbitrage remittance results from high bond cash balances that the State carried for several years.
Legislation introduced during the 2003 session is purporting to minimize the likelihood of the State being
assessed arbitrage earnings in the future (discussed further in the Issues section).
General funds for debt service payment increase a total of $3.1 million or 1.7% over fiscal 2003 to
$187 million. These general funds include both the funds credited directly to the Annuity Bond Fund and
those budgeted in the MSDE and received as reimbursable funds. The last two years’ general funds have
been substantially (8%-10%) lower than the fiscal 2002 actual of $204 million. The decline is attributable
to the State’s receipt of large premium payments in the bond sales occurring in 2001 ($29.8 million) and
2002 ($46.9 million). Also, reducing general funds is the growth in the property tax receipts ($18.6
million or 6.6%) over fiscal 2003. Exhibit 1 lists the sources and uses of revenues appropriated to the
3
X00A00 - Public Debt
Annuity Bond Fund for fiscal 2002 through 2004.
Exhibit 1
Annuity Bond Fund Revenues
Debt Service, Discount/Penalties, and Refunded Bond Proceeds
FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004
Actual Working Allowance
Special Fund Income
Balance Beginning $10,178,753 $14,040,453 $14,806,746
Property Taxes
Receipts 270,009,145 282,503,990 301,069,669
Interest and Penalties 1,703,632 1,200,000 1,200,000
Other Repayments 3,852,147 2,915,520 2,769,018
Miscellaneous Receipts 295,744 589,610 777,472
Accrued Interest on Bonds Sold 1,234,652
Prior Year’s Discount -8,053 -23,195
Bond Premium* 18,373,467 30,515,851 20,142,133
Transfer to Reserve -14,040,453 -14,806,746 -181,264
Subtotal Special Funds 291,599,034 316,935,483 340,583,774
General Fund Support
Approp. Directly to Annuity Bond Fund 103,094,800 90,500,000 82,100,000
Budgeted in MSDE 100,522,850 89,862,347 104,909,714
Subtotal General Funds 203,617,650 180,362,347 187,009,714
Total Funds -- Debt Service 495,216,684 497,297,830 527,593,488
Penalty\Discount Expenses (General Funds)
Discount 0 0
Penalty and Arbitrage 360,000 3,520,000
Total Discount\Penalty Expenses 360,000 3,520,000
Total Refunded Bond Proceeds 117,215,608 315,327,874
Total Discount\Penalty Expenses\Refunded Bond Proceeds 117,575,608 318,847,874
Total -- All Fund Debts Service\Discount\Refunded Proceeds 612,792,292 816,145,704 527,593,488
Total -- Direct General Funds to Annuity Bond Fund $203,977,650 $183,882,347 $187,009,714
*Bond premiums received during a sale are allocated over multiple fiscal years to comply with Internal Revenue Services
regulations. Of the $18 million allocated in fiscal 2002, $2.6 million is from the 2000 bond sales and $15.7 million is from sales
during 2001. Of the $30.5 million allocated in fiscal 2003, $14 million is from sales during 2001 and $16.5 million is from the
2002 sales. The $20 million allocated in fiscal 2004 derives from the 2002 sales and an additional $10.3 million will be applied in
fiscal 2005.
Source: State Budget Books
4
X00A00 - Public Debt
Issues
1. Altering the Accounting for General Obligation Bond Proceeds
The General Assembly authorizes specific capital projects or programs within the Maryland
Consolidated Capital Bond Loan (MCCBL), commonly referred to as the capital bond bill, as well as, in
separate local bond bills. To fund the authorized projects or programs, the State issues on a consolidated
basis bonds that provide the proceeds for each of the specified capital items. A separate account is
established for each authorized capital item for the purpose of tracking expenditures from the bond sale
proceeds.
Due to the current accounting method, the State has had to remit payment to the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) for arbitrage (federal taxes on unused bonds) An issuer is obligated to compute arbitrage
rebate obligations at least every five years after the bonds are sold. This required remittance has resulted
from the State deriving earnings (greater than the bond rate) from the accumulation of proceeds from a
particular sale and the specified projects not moving forward in a timely manner to expend the cash
proceeds. Currently, the proceeds of each individual State bond sale can only be used for the specified
projects or programs.
Legislation introduced this session (Senate Bill 126/House Bill 139) seeks to alter the accounting
method for general obligation bond proceeds from a project accounting basis to a cash flow basis. The
proposed legislation requires the Comptroller to establish the State and Local Facilities Loan Fund. This
fund will allow for a new account method that broadens the uses of the bond proceeds beyond that of the
specifically stated projects for that particular State bond sale. The proposed act, specifically, calls for the
establishment of an account in the Fund where the proceeds of the sale of State bonds will be allocated
amongst broad categorical project accounts. Although the fund will continue to make use of appropriate
subaccounts that reflect the individual capital projects, the establishment of the fund will allow the
authorized bond proceeds to be transferred to and expended from the fund. In practice this means that the
Comptroller, with approval from the Board of Public Works (BPW), will be able to expend money from
the fund for any authorized project or program regardless of whether that current State bond sale included
that specifically funded project or program. This will prevent the occurrence of high bond cash balances
since the proceeds can be used to finance projects ready to move forward. The legislation also proposes to
allow the Comptroller to restate prior expenditures of bond proceeds to comply with the Internal Revenue
Code and avert the anticipated State liability for arbitrage earnings.
The fiscal 2004 allowance does not provide funds for the remittance of arbitrage earnings and tax
rebate penalties. The fiscal 2003 working appropriation included $3.5 million for that purpose. Arbitrage
remittance results from high bond cash balances that the State carries for several years. The proposed
legislation purports to minimize the likelihood of the State being assessed with arbitrage earnings in the
future. If the proposed accounting change does not meet the IRS compliance standards, the State will
have an unfunded liability estimated at $5 million in fiscal 2004. The State Treasurer’s Office should
brief the committees on the need for the pending legislation, including its assessment of IRS
compliance, and discuss the impact of implementation, both administrative and budgetary. Also,
the State Treasurer’s Office should address the potential of an unfunded liability estimated at $5
5
X00A00 - Public Debt
million, if the legislation is not passed in time and/or the proposed change does not meet IRS
compliance standards.
2. Annuity Bond Fund Projections
The Annuity Bond Fund provides for debt service payments on the State’s general obligation bond
debt. The fund’s sources of revenue are property taxes, general funds, and other special funds. Property
tax receipts are the constitutionally pledged dedicated revenue for debt service payment. In contrast,
general funds are used to make up the difference between actual debt service costs and the other available
fund sources. Since 1982, the State has maintained a constant property tax rate by using general funds.
Other special funds are primarily monies collected from bond premiums, interest on bonds sold and other
miscellaneous receipts.
Debt service is estimated for fiscal 2004 to be $527.6 million. That projected amount is up by 6.5%
from the actual expenditure in fiscal 2002 of $495 million. Debt service in fiscal 2003 ($497 million) is
expected to remain fairly constant with fiscal 2002 due to the savings achieved from refunding existing
general obligation debt.
As shown in Exhibit 2, the out-year debt service projections for fiscal 2004 through fiscal 2008 reveal
that the average annual growth rate will remain at 6.3% or on average an annual increase of $36 million.
The largest annual increase in debt service is anticipated to occur between fiscal 2005 and 2006 (9% or up
$51 million over the previous year). That increase is directly attributable to the State’s current plan to
issue more debt in fiscal 2003, 2004, and possibly 2005. The State’s pattern of issuance of debt is greatly
impacted by the replacement of debt for previously authorized PAYGO projects and the anticipated
substitution of debt for planned PAYGO for fiscal 2004. Prior to the State’s current need for additional
debt capacity, debt service increased between fiscal 1999 and 2002 at an average annual rate of 5.9% or on
average about $26 million per year.
6
X00A00 - Public Debt
Exhibit 2
Projected Annuity Bond Fund
($ in Millions)
Debt Service Property Tax General Funds Other Funds
% of Debt % of Debt % of Debt
% Inc. % Inc. Service % Inc. Service Service
FY 2004 $527.6 $301.1 57.1% $187.0 35.4% $39.5 7.5%
FY 2005 557.4 5.7% 320.5 6.5% 57.5% 223.6 19.6% 40.1% 13.3 2.4%
FY 2006 608.0 9.1% 333.3 4.0% 54.8% 271.7 21.5% 44.7% 3.0 0.5%
FY 2007 645.0 6.1% 343.3 3.0% 53.2% 298.7 9.9% 46.3% 3.0 0.5%
FY 2008 672.4 4.2% 351.9 2.5% 52.3% 317.5 6.3% 47.2% 3.0 0.4%
Source: Department of Budget and Management
Also illustrated in the table are the proportional changes amongst the three main revenue sources that
provide for the State’s debt service payment. In the next five years, barring no changes in the State’s
policy to maintain the current property tax rate and assuming a discontinuation of the recent trend of the
State receiving large premiums at the time of sale, the proportion of debt service provided directly from
the property tax receipts will decline from 57% to 52%. The decline occurs simply because the average
annual growth in debt service at 6% outpaces the anticipated growth rate in property tax revenues of 4%.
In contrast to that decline is the rise in the proportion of debt service met from general funds. It is
estimated to climb from 35% in fiscal 2004 to 47% in fiscal 2008.
As a result of the widening gap between property tax receipts and the debt service requirement,
reliance on general funds for the annuity bond fund will increase at an average annual rate of 14% or $33
million more per year. Specifically, the projections indicate that general funds for debt service will rise
from $187 million in 2004 to nearly $318 million in fiscal 2008. The general fund revenue forecast for
fiscal 2004 through 2008 provides for an average annual growth rate of 4.7%. Hence, when placing the
general funds required for debt service into the overall context of the State’s general fund expenditures,
debt service will account for 1.86% of general fund revenues in fiscal 2004 and will rise steadily to 2.63%
in fiscal 2008. Few general fund expenditures in the budget are forecasted to grow at such a high rate.
Moreover, the growth in the demands for general funds to support other high priority policy areas such as
education, public safety, and the environment are expected to continue and intensify. Consequently, these
factors signal the need to review the current State policy of maintaining a stable property tax rate at the
expense of other general fund expenditures. With the increasing competition for general funds and the
anticipated declining proportion that property tax represents of debt service, which adds to the strain on
the general fund, the State should consider modifying its use of general funds by capping the general fund
allocation for debt service at 2% of the total estimated general revenues. A 2% cap allows the State to
7
X00A00 - Public Debt
continue to provide a strong moderating factor on the growth rate in the property tax rate while also
stabilizing the proportion of debt service met through general funds to roughly 36%.
The Department of Legislative Services recommends adding language to the Maryland code
that establishes the Annuity Bond Fund (State Finance and Procurement Article Section 8-132).
The language would indicate that the general funds credited to the Annuity Bond Fund by the
Comptroller could not exceed 2% of the estimated general fund revenues (Bureau of Revenues) for
that fiscal year. If the credited amount (general and special) is insufficient to meet the debt service
requirement on State bonds, the Comptroller will send notification to the Board of Public Works,
prior to May 1. This change can be effectuated through the Budget Reconciliation and Financing
Act of 2003.
3. State’s Deficit Creates General Fund Premium – Property Tax and Other Special
Funds for Debt Service
The State faces a budget shortfall of nearly $900 million in the 2003 session for fiscal 2004. As a
result, general fund expenditures need to be carefully examined to determine appropriateness and where if
applicable, alternative funding can be sought (federal or special funds). The State’s debt service payments
with its use of general funds (35% of the proposed debt service payment in fiscal 2004) should not be
excluded from this critical examination.
The current State property tax rate is 8.4 cents and revenues from the tax are dedicated to cover debt
service costs for State general obligation bonds. The fiscal 2004 allowance includes an estimated $301
million in property tax receipts. Since 1982, the property tax rate has not been adjusted. While the rate
has not changed, debt service costs have increased, with general funds making up the bulk of that
difference to cover the required costs. The fiscal 2004 allowance provides $187 million in general funds.
These general funds are proposed to meet the estimated total debt service costs while maintaining the
current property tax rate and utilizing the other available special funds ($39.5 million) including bond
premiums. The general funds include both the funds credited directly to the Annuity Bond Fund and those
budgeted in MSDE and received as reimbursable funds.
There are numerous instances throughout the proposed fiscal 2004 budget where special funds are
being used in place of general funds. The use of special funds, in this manner, is in recognition of the
scarcity of general funds in fiscal 2004. The State’s payment of debt service is an expenditure that has its
own dedicated revenue source. General obligation bonds are secured by the State property tax (Article
III, Section 34). This revenue source has the built-in administrative mechanisms that provides for an
annual alignment of the estimated expenditure (debt service requirement) with revenue generation.
Annually the Board of Public Work (BPW) is tasked with setting a State tax rate (by May 1 of each year)
sufficient to provide revenues to meet debt service requirements on outstanding general obligation bonds
during the next fiscal year. In setting the rate, BPW considers the general funds appropriated in the
recently enacted budget as well as special fund projections including the property tax receipts.
8
X00A00 - Public Debt
If special funds, in particular property tax receipts, were to be provided in lieu of the proposed general
funds, the resulting impact on the property tax rate and receipts might be as follows:
Fiscal 2004
Current Estimated
Real Property Assessable Base $359,472,676 $359,472,676
Homestead Credit -2,513,000 -2,513,000
Tax Rate per $100 assessed 0.084 0.137142432
Subtotal Real Property $299,846,128 $489,543,182
Utilities Assessable Base 1,605,235 1,605,235
Tax Rate per $100 assessed 0.210 0.220
Subtotal Utilities $3,370,994 $3,531,517
Estimated Property Tax Revenues 303,217,121 493,074,699
Less 1.5% not collected 4,548,257 7,396,120
Estimated Collections 298,668,865 485,678,579
Collections from Prior Years 2,400,805 2,400,805
Total Property Tax $301,069,670 $488,079,384
General Funds 187,009,714 0
Other Special Funds 39,514,105 39,514,105
Debt Service Requirement $527,593,489 $527,593,489
The above scenario is only an example of the various ways to generate additional receipts. As this
example illustrates, the real property tax rate would increase on the magnitude of 63% (5.3 cents) and the
utilities rate at nearly 5% (one cent). Attempts to mitigate the tax rate increases, in particular the real
property tax rate, will result in a continuation of general fund support. A one-cent increase in both the
property tax rate for the real and utilities assessable base is estimated to yield $35 million.
In light of the State’s current fiscal condition, the Department of Legislative Services
recommends that a greater portion of debt service payment for fiscal 2004 be derived from special
funds, including the revenues from the dedicated property tax and other special monies such as
bond premiums available for fiscal 2004. This recommendation is consistent with the options
considered by the commission on Maryland’s Fiscal Structure, chaired by Fred Puddester. The
commission, in its 2002 interim report, included increasing the State property tax rate to cover
more debt service among its list of short-term revenue measures to fill the budget shortfall during
recessionary periods. The proposed general funds of $187,009,714 for this purpose should be
reduced by $100,000,000 contingent on the availability of an alternative funding source of
equivalent amount. It is anticipated that the alternative funding source, necessitated by the
reduction in general funds support for fiscal 2004, will derive from the annual levy and collection of
the property tax. The continuation of general fund support for debt service mitigates the property
tax rate increase (estimated at 33%).
9
X00A00 - Public Debt
Recommended Actions
1. Add the following language to the general fund appropriation:
, provided that $100,000,000 of this appropriation shall be deleted contingent on the availability of
an alternative funding source of an equivalent amount.
Explanation: This language provides for the reduction of general funds for debt service, if an
alternative funding source is provided. Special funds in the form of property tax revenues could be
levied and collected.
10
X00A00 - Public Debt
Updates
1. Public Bond Market Could Be Impacted by the Proposed Tax Plan
Within President’s Bush tax proposal is a component that would create a disincentive for corporations
to invest in municipal bonds. Under the plan, corporations could pay out tax-exempt dividends to
investors if they have paid full corporate tax on their income. By allowing this new exemption, it creates
greater competition for municipal bonds. It is expected that the municipal bond issuers will be forced to
pay higher interest rates on debt in order to remain attractive to individual as well as institutional investors.
Institutional investors make up 21% of the bond market.
Early estimates predict a rise in interest rate for municipal bonds of on average .25 - .50 percentage
points. Using the base interest rate of 4.5% (interest costs over 15 years are estimated at $43.3 million per
$100 million sold), an increase of .25 percentage points result in an additional $2.6 million per $100 million
sold. Similarly, an increase of an additional .50 percentage points on the base rate results in $5.1 million
more in interest costs. Increases in the cost of borrowing also impacts a state’s capacity to issue more
bonds since debt service becomes more expensive.
11
X00A00 - Public Debt
Appendix 1
Current and Prior Year Budgets
Current and Prior Year Budgets
Public Debt
($ in Thousands)
General Special Federal Reimb.
Fund Fund Fund Fund Total
Fiscal 2002
Legislative
Appropriation $103,455 $293,607 $0 $100,523 $497,585
Deficiency
Appropriation 0 0 0 0 0
Budget
Amendments 0 117,216 0 0 117,216
Reversions and
Cancellations 0 -2,008 0 0 -2,008
Actual
Expenditures $103,455 $408,815 $0 $100,523 $612,793
Fiscal 2003
Legislative
Appropriation $94,020 $311,357 $0 $89,862 $495,239
Budget
Amendments 0 320,906 0 0 320,906
Working
Appropriation $94,020 $632,263 $0 $89,862 $816,146
Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding.
12
X00A00 - Public Debt
Fiscal 2002
In fiscal 2002, the Annuity Bond Fund was increased by $117,215,608. The increase was in special
funds and was a result of proceeds received from the March 6, 2002, bond sale that included the refunding
of general obligation bonds. The budget amendment authorized the expenditure of the proceeds on
government-backed securities that are held in escrow for the bondholders. Funds not needed for debt
service at the end of the year are cancelled and remain in the annuity bond fund for use in the next year.
Fiscal 2003
The fiscal 2003 special fund adjustment reflects the Annuity Bond Fund receiving proceeds from the
July 31, 2002, bond sale ($315,327,874) that included refunding general obligation bonds. It also reflects
the net adjustment in special funds resulting from a revision in the estimates for debt service (downward
due to refunding), property tax receipts and premiums.
13
Object/Fund Difference Report
Public Debt
FY03
FY02 Working FY04 FY03 - FY04 Percent
Object/Fund Actual Appropriation Allowance Amount Change Change
Objects
13 Fixed Charges $ 612,792,292 $ 816,145,704 $ 527,593,488 -$ 288,552,216 -35.4%
Total Objects $ 612,792,292 $ 816,145,704 $ 527,593,488 -$ 288,552,216 -35.4%
Funds
01 General Fund $ 103,454,800 $ 94,020,000 $ 82,100,000 -$ 11,920,000 -12.7%
03 Special Fund 408,814,642 632,263,357 340,583,774 -291,679,583 -46.1%
09 Reimbursable Fund 100,522,850 89,862,347 104,909,714 15,047,367 16.7%
14
Total Funds $ 612,792,292 $ 816,145,704 $ 527,593,488 -$ 288,552,216 -35.4%
Note: Fiscal 2003 appropriations and fiscal 2004 allowance do not include cost containment and contingent reductions.
X00A00 - Public Debt
Ã
Appendix 2
Fiscal Summary
Public Debt
FY03 FY03
FY02 Legislative Working FY02 - FY03 FY04 FY03 - FY04
Unit/Program Actual Appropriation Appropriation % Change Allowance % Change
01 Redemption and Interest on State Bonds $ 495,216,684 $ 491,719,499 $ 497,297,830 0.4% $ 527,593,488 6.1%
05 Related Expenses on State Bonds 117,575,608 3,520,000 318,847,874 171.2% 0 -100.0%
Total Expenditures $ 612,792,292 $ 495,239,499 $ 816,145,704 33.2% $ 527,593,488 -35.4%
General Fund $ 103,454,800 $ 94,020,000 $ 94,020,000 -9.1% $ 82,100,000 -12.7%
Special Fund 408,814,642 311,357,152 632,263,357 54.7% 340,583,774 -46.1%
Total Appropriations $ 512,269,442 $ 405,377,152 $ 726,283,357 41.8% $ 422,683,774 -41.8%
15
Reimbursable Fund $ 100,522,850 $ 89,862,347 $ 89,862,347 -10.6% $ 104,909,714 16.7%
Total Funds $ 612,792,292 $495,239,499 $ 816,145,704 33.2% $ 527,593,488 -35.4%
X00A00 - Public Debt
Ã
Note: Fiscal 2003 appropriations and fiscal 2004 allowance do not include cost containment and contingent reductions.
Appendix 3