Money moving between city funds

In short

• In 2025 the city moved $12,971,511 between its own funds.¹
• About $4.3 million of that was for growth deals with businesses.¹²
• The golf fund sent $1 million to the main fund.¹

Numbers marked “our math” are our estimates, not official figures. The notes show the inputs and the steps.

What a transfer is

The city keeps its money in separate funds. A transfer moves money from one fund to another. It is not new money. The water and sewer fund’s yearly payment is on its own page: utility fund overhead payments.

Each transfer in 2025

From	To	Amount	Reason the audit gives
Main fund	Building projects fund	$5,913,604	Fund building projects
Smaller funds	Building projects fund	$3,230,856	Growth deals with businesses
Water and sewer fund	Main fund	$1,500,000	Administrative overhead
Smaller funds	Debt fund	$1,102,250	Growth deals with businesses
Golf fund	Main fund	$1,000,000	City projects charged to the golf fund
Main fund	Smaller funds	$224,801	Public art and growth deals

All amounts are from the audit.¹ “Smaller funds” is our plain name for what the audit calls nonmajor funds. “Growth deals” is our name for what the audit calls economic development incentive agreements.

Growth-deal money

Two transfers were for growth deals. Together they come to $4,333,106 (our math).² One went to building projects. The other went to the fund that pays debt.¹

A gap in the audit’s tables

The audit has two tables. The first says the main fund sent out $5,888,405. The second lists $6,138,405 going out of the main fund (our math). The gap is $250,000. That matches a $250,000 transfer out of the building projects fund in the first table. The second table does not list it.³

The other side

• A transfer is not new money. The same dollar leaves one city fund and lands in another.
• Some transfers pay back shared costs. The golf fund’s $1 million was for “City projects allocated to Golf Fund.”¹
• What the sources do not show: that any money is missing. The gap is between two tables in the audit.³

Questions to ask

• Why does the second table leave out the transfer from the building projects fund, by the city’s account?
• Which growth deals did this money go to?
• Which city projects were allocated to the golf fund?

Changes to this page

• Nov. 2, 2026: Rewrote the questions to ask so each is open, neutral and addressed to the public body.
• Nov. 2, 2026: Added an other-side section and questions to ask.
• Nov. 2, 2026: New page.

Footnotes

1. City of Leander, Texas, Annual Financial Report for fiscal 2025, Note 7, “Interfund Transfers,” p.52: total transfers $12,971,511. Purposes: Capital Projects Fund from General Fund $5,913,604 “Fund Capital Projects”; Capital Projects Fund from NonMajor Funds $3,230,856 “Economic Development Incentive Agreements”; Debt Service Fund from NonMajor Funds $1,102,250 “Economic Development Incentive Agreements”; NonMajor Funds from General Fund $224,801 “Public Arts Fund & Economic Development Incentive Agreements”; General Fund from Utility Fund $1,500,000 “Administrative Overhead”; General Fund from Golf Fund $1,000,000 “City projects allocated to Golf Fund.” ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶

2. Our math: $3,230,856 + $1,102,250 = $4,333,106. The first table in Note 7 also shows nonmajor funds transferring out $4,333,106. ↩ ↩²

3. Our math from Note 7, p.52. First table: General Fund transfer out $(5,888,405); Capital Projects Fund transfer out $(250,000). Second table, General Fund as the source: $5,913,604 + $224,801 = $6,138,405. $6,138,405 − $5,888,405 = $250,000. ↩ ↩²