SANTA ROSA CIVIC
Meetings & Decisions
Budget & Finances
Budget · Full data set

Every number behind the budget story

The Budget Story covers the four questions residents ask first. This page holds everything else — 11 sections, each a full section of real charts and tables, not a quick preview. Pick a topic below, or scroll straight through.

Choose what to explore

General Fund spending by department, FY2018–FY2025. FY2025 actual was $231.5M up from $163.4M in FY2018 — figures are nominal dollars, not adjusted for inflation or population growth.

FY2025 spending by department

  1. Police$78.9M
  2. Fire$60.9M
  3. Public Works$25.6M
  4. Planning and Economic Development$17.9M
  5. Community Services$17.4M
  6. Nondepartmental$8.9M
  7. Finance$7.9M
  8. City Manager$4.3M
  9. City Attorney$4.3M
  10. Human Resources$3.8M
  11. City Council$1.5M

Total General Fund spending, FY2018–FY2025

FY18: $163.4MFY19: $171.0MFY20: $173.7MFY21: $181.5MFY22: $186.4MFY23: $191.7MFY24: $205.5MFY25: $231.5MFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25

Source: Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports (audited actuals) and the adopted/proposed budget for years without an audit yet.

Budget vs. Actual

Back to index ↑

FY2025 actual spending came in $3.9M (1.7%) below the adopted budget, and $2.4M below the final amended budget (the version council approved mid-year, after adjustments). Department-level variance below, largest first.

DepartmentAdopted budgetActualVariance
Planning and Economic Development$20.4M$17.9M-$2.6M
Fire$58.5M$60.9M+$2.5M
City Manager$5.6M$4.3M-$1.3M
Human Resources$5.0M$3.8M-$1.1M
Public Works$26.2M$25.6M-$0.5M
City Attorney$4.6M$4.3M-$0.3M
Finance$8.1M$7.9M-$0.2M
Nondepartmental$9.1M$8.9M-$0.2M
City Council$1.6M$1.5M-$0.1M
Police$78.9M$78.9M+$0.0M
Community Services$17.4M$17.4M+$0.0M

Source: FY2025 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, budgetary comparison schedule.

Compensation

Back to index ↑

Total city compensation (wages + benefits) reached $161.6M in calendar year 2024 across 1834 employees, up from $132.7M in 2018. Overtime was 8.6% of wages city-wide — but Fire Department alone ran 37.6% overtime in 2024, above every other department.

Total compensation by year

2018: $132.7M2019: $134.3M2020: $136.5M2021: $145.2M2022: $142.9M2023: $156.3M2024: $161.6M2018201920202021202220232024

Top departments by total compensation, 2024

  1. Police Department$33.6M
  2. Fire Department$32.8M
  3. Water$30.4M
  4. Public Works$19.0M
  5. Recreation & Parks$9.6M
  6. Planning & Economic Develop$8.8M
  7. Finance$6.5M
  8. Transit$5.5M

Source: State Controller’s Office Government Compensation in California database. Calendar years don't align exactly with the city's July–June fiscal year, so these figures shouldn't be compared directly to the ACFR spending figures above.

Fund Balance

Back to index ↑

The General Fund closed FY2025 with $155.6M in total fund balance. Reserves stood at 7.3 months of spending — a “green” level, though the trend has been declining. Unassigned balance — money with no earmark — is shown separately below; most of what's held is often assigned to specific future uses, not freely available.

FY2025 balance composition

  • Assigned46.4%
  • Nonspendable0.9%
  • Unassigned44.3%

Unassigned balance, FY2018–FY2025

FY18: $19.4MFY19: $29.3MFY20: $23.6MFY21: $36.8MFY22: $49.4MFY23: $57.1MFY24: $58.1MFY25: $68.9MFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25

Source: Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports, governmental funds balance sheet.

Pension Obligations

Back to index ↑

The tread water threshold is the minimum annual contribution that keeps the unfunded pension liability from growing — normal cost plus interest on the existing shortfall. Paying below it means the liability grows even while payments are being made. In 0 of the last 0 years, contributions to the Miscellaneous plan fell short of tread water; the Safety plan fell short in 0 of 0 years. Combined net pension liability reached $452.9M as of FY2024.

Source: Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports, net pension liability by plan.

Structural Balance

Back to index ↑

Structural balance measures whether recurring revenues cover recurring expenditures — set aside one-time items like asset sales, capital spending, or inter-fund transfers. A surplus means ongoing operations are self-sustaining; a deficit means the city is using one-time money to fund ongoing services. FY2025 closed with a structural surplus of $5.9M (2.5% of recurring revenue). 0 of the last 8 years closed with a structural deficit.

Recurring revenue minus recurring expenditure, FY2018–FY2025

FY18: $2.3MFY19: $15.5MFY20: $11.8MFY21: $110.5MFY22: $14.0MFY23: $16.6MFY24: $17.7MFY25: $5.9MFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25

A structural surplus can coexist with a falling fund balance — that happens when the balance decline comes from inter-fund transfers (a financing decision) rather than weaker operations. Source: Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports.

Net Position

Back to index ↑

Net position is the government-wide equivalent of net worth — total assets minus total liabilities, including long-term obligations like pensions, OPEB, and bonded debt that don't appear in the General Fund figures above. Total net position was $419.4M at the end of FY2025, up $23.7M for the year. Of that total, unrestricted position was a deficit of $146.0M — a common condition for cities carrying significant pension liabilities when negative.

Composition, FY2025 (excludes unrestricted)

  • Net investment in capital assets102.9%
  • Restricted31.9%

Total net position, FY2018–FY2025

FY18: $205.3MFY19: $210.6MFY20: $197.1MFY21: $285.7MFY22: $338.4MFY23: $365.4MFY24: $405.1MFY25: $419.4MFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25

Government-wide figures use full accrual accounting (GASB 34) and differ from the General Fund fund-balance figures above, which use modified accrual accounting and exclude long-term liabilities. Source: Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports, statement of net position.

Revenue Volatility

Back to index ↑

Coefficient of variation (CoV) measures year-to-year swings as a share of the average — higher means less predictable, and a volatile source needs bigger reserves to absorb a down year. The bigger risk sits in Sales taxes: it grew from $47.8M to $69.1M over this window — a large, now-load-bearing revenue source worth watching.

Volatility ranking

  1. Net change in the fair value of investmentsCoV 919%
  2. OtherCoV 192%
  3. Investment earningsCoV 85%
  4. IntergovernmentalCoV 43%
  5. Licenses and permitsCoV 17%
  6. Fines and forfeituresCoV 14%
  7. Utility users taxCoV 14%
  8. Sales taxesCoV 13%
  9. Property taxesCoV 12%
  10. Other taxesCoV 10%
  11. Charges for servicesCoV 10%

CoV computed across all years on file. Transfers excluded — they’re financing activity, not operating revenue. Source: Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports, governmental funds revenue detail.

All-Funds Overview

Back to index ↑

Not enough data on file yet for this section.

The city carries $1112.3M in net book value of capital assets — infrastructure, buildings, land, and equipment, net of depreciation — as of FY2025. Separately, $0.0M in capital improvement projects is planned or underway across 6 categories, led by Water.

Net book value by category, FY2025

  1. Improvements other than buildings$408.8M
  2. Infrastructure$243.3M
  3. Construction in progress$156.0M
  4. Buildings$131.5M
  5. Land$84.6M
  6. Equipment$79.0M
  7. Intangible right-to-use SBITA asset$3.9M
  8. Intangibles$2.8M
  9. Intangible right-to-use lease asset$2.2M

Capital improvement plan, by category

CategoryProjectsTotal est.FY budgetSpent
Water6$3.2M
Public Works26$21.0M
Fire1$0.2M
Fire Department2$0.9M
Santa Rosa Water62$41.0M
Recreation and Parks16$8.9M

Source: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report capital asset schedules; adopted Capital Improvement Program.

Finance Decoder

Back to index ↑

Seven fiscal-health indicators based on the Strong Towns Finance Decoder methodology, computed from government-wide (governmental activities) data in the ACFRs. The composite read for FY2025 is red, with an improving multi-year trend on net financial position — it peaked at -$110.8M in FY2022.

Net financial position, FY2018–FY2025

FY18: -$231.2MFY19: -$212.4MFY20: -$239.0MFY21: -$149.1MFY22: -$110.8MFY23: -$166.2MFY24: -$137.5MFY25: -$111.8MFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25

Net Financial Position

-$111.8M

Liquid assets minus total liabilities. Negative means obligations exceed financial assets — the city is relying on future revenues to cover past bills.

Financial Assets-to-Liabilities

0.79×

Liquid assets ÷ total liabilities. Below 1.0 means the city cannot pay off its obligations with financial assets alone.

Assets-to-Liabilities

1.64×

Total assets (including infrastructure) ÷ total liabilities. Below 1.0 = insolvent; above 1.0 = owns more than it owes.

Net Debt-to-Total Revenues

0.00×

Years of revenue needed to pay off net debt. Zero means no net debt. A rising trend would signal growing unsustainability.

Interest-to-Total Revenues

0.1%

Share of revenue consumed by interest payments. Rising = past borrowing crowding out current services.

Net Book-to-Cost of Capital Assets

0.45×

Current value ÷ original cost of infrastructure. A declining trend signals aging assets and deferred maintenance.

Government Transfers-to-Total Revenues

17.4%

Share of revenue from state/federal aid. Rising = more exposure to funding decisions outside local control.

Based on the Strong Towns Finance Decoder. Source data is governmental activities only. Some years pending ACFR backfill.