On December 30, 2010, the City of Coyote borrowed \($20,000\) for the General Fund on a 60-day note. In that fund, both Cash and Other Financing Sources were recorded. In the general information, a \($30,000\) overall increase was reported in the General Fund balance. What was the correct change in the General Fund’s balance for 2010?

Assume that the City of Coyote has already produced its financial statements for December 31, 2010, and the year then ended. The city’s General Fund was only for education and parks. Its Capital Projects Funds worked with each of these functions at times. The city also had established an Enterprise Fund to account for its art museum.
The government-wide financial statements indicated the following figures:
• Education reported net expenses of \($600,000\).
• Parks reported net expenses of \($100,000\).
• Art museum reported net revenues of \($50,000\).
• General government revenues for the year were \($800,000\) with an overall increase in the city’s net assets of \($150,000\).
The fund-based financial statements indicated the following for the entire year:
• The General Fund reported a \($30,000\) increase in its fund balance.
• The Capital Projects Fund reported a \($40,000\) increase in its fund balance.
• The Enterprise Fund reported a \($60,000\) increase in its net assets.
The CPA firm of Abernethy and Chapman has been asked to review several transactions that occurred during 2010 and indicate how to correct any erroneous reporting and the impact of each error. View each situation as independent.