Next Logan County Fiscal Year Budget turns black with C.A.R.E. funds and annual department returns

 

[December 07, 2020] 

At the Logan County Regular Board meeting on Tuesday, November 24, the board voted to approve the Fiscal Year 20/21 budget with a number of amendments.

Board members present were David Blankenship, Emily Davenport, Janet Estill, Cameron Halpin, David Hepler, Steve Jenness, Bob Sanders, Annette Welch and Jim Wessbecher. Bob Farmer and Scott Schaffenacker were absent.

Finance Committee Chairman David Hepler brought forward the following motions for approval:

• The Audit Engagement Letter. It is something that must be approved annually.
   

• A resolution for the Appellate Prosecutor Agreement.
   

• A resolution to amend the FY 19/20 Budget for Building & Grounds Committee.
   

• A resolution to amend the FY 19/20 Budget for Circuit Clerk’s Office to transfer funds between two different line items in that budget to cover employee training along with part time help, per statute.
   

• A resolution amending the FY 19/20 Budget in the amount of $1,200 to the coroner’s budget.
   

• Bringing the FY 20/21 Proposed Budget off display.
   

• A resolution for Annual Abatement Ordinance abating the tax levied for the year 2020 to pay the principal of and interest on Taxable General Obligation Bonds (Courthouse Public Facility Sales Tax Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2020A, and General Obligation Bonds (Courthouse Public Facility Sales Tax Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2020B, of the county.
   

• A resolution for the Annual Abatement Ordinance abating the tax here to levied for the year 2020 to pay the principal of and interest on $600,000 Taxable General Obligation Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2012, of the county.
   

• The County Budget Appropriation Ordinance.
   

• The FY 20/21 Tax Levies.

These levies must be approved every year and include the levies for the General Fund, Bonds and interest, Liability Insurance, Health Department Fund and Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund.

• Other levies are for the Highway Matching Tax Fund, County Bridge Fund, County Highway Fund, Ambulance Service Fund, Tuberculosis/Sanitarium Fund, Cooperative Extension Service Fund, County Veteran Assistance Fund and Senior Citizen’s Tax Fund.

Hepler said the property tax the county was able to levy for was two to three times the cost of living in terms of the increase. That means in a very difficult year, the county has been able to generate more property taxes.

Line item amendments

These 22 amendments were approved last month, but Hepler said they could be further addressed. They would be adopted as part of the FY 2020/21 budget.

• Hepler then amended a request to move $2,000 between line items.

Due to an incorrect line item in the original amendment, Thomas suggested putting the $2,000 in the general fund.

The initial amendment passed. However, Blankenship made a motion for reconsideration which was followed by some discussion about this issue. The amount was being moved to cover a salary increase for someone for next year.

Welch said she sees both sides. She understands the board feeling like it does not have a lot of control when it comes to the budget if departments still make changes in their budget. However, since union employees get annual raises, Welch said she is torn. If department heads are more lean in their budget and can find the money to make [an increase] work and advocate for their employees, Welch understands that.

Blankenship said he is surprised that increase is not in the form of a bonus if paid out of a grant. Though he usually votes yes on increases, Blankenship said it is not the year to increase salaries and IMRF.

The request to move the amount then failed 4-5 with Blankenship, Davenport, Estill, Halpin and Jenness voting no.

FY 20/21 budget amendments

A motion was next brought off the floor to approve several amendments for the FY 20/21 budget beyond the ones made last month.

These included:

• Blankenship’s amendment to transfer $100,000 from bond monies to be escrowed to Building & Grounds for a facility manager/building maintenance engineer was approved.

The Building and Grounds Committee has recommended the hiring of the Facility Manager/Building Maintenance Engineer. Blankenship said this person could be utilized at county facilities aside from the Safety Complex because the sheriff has his own maintenance staff. The person would be under the supervision of the county board, particularly a combination of the board chairman and building and grounds chair.

Though $100,000 is being transferred, Blankenship said it does not mean it will all be expensed out. It just allows for some leeway.

• Wessbecher’s amendment to reimburse $83,000 to the Farm Fund.

The money was taken out of account a few years ago to help pay for removing and restoring the stained glass from the dome. Wessbecher said that in June Board Member Chuck Ruben had suggested repaying that amount when the bond came in.

Though Blankenship said he agrees with reimbursing the farm account, the money would come out of the restoration fund account. Until we have more solid numbers regarding the restoration, Blankenship said he does not know if we should do that now. His concern is the timing.

Sanders agrees and said we should focus on the restoration and then address the money owed to the farm account.

Jenness asked what farm and airport expenses come out of the Airport and Farm account.

The committee is looking at some projects. Wessbecher said they are working on a drainage system. He is concerned about money from this account used in the past not being reimbursed.

The major criminal case fund has also been borrowed from over the years and Davenport said it needs to be reimbursed at some point.

To ensure these accounts would be reimbursed at some point, Blankenship asked if there was a “trust” or something like that they could put it in.

Thomas said it could be put in the audit as courthouse restoration owes the farm account and major criminal cases fund 'this' much money.

In six months, when the county has a better projection of funds, Sanders asked whether the issue could be revisited.

Until then, Hepler said maybe the money should be put in a holding account.

• A line item was in the budget for the usual $5,000 donation to the GPEDC (Greater Peoria Economic Development Council) and Hepler motioned to remove that line item.

Over the past several years, Hepler said the county has invested $5,000 year, which adds up to around $30,000 dollars in the GPEDC. He feels the county has got little return from it.

What Hepler would like is for some of the funding to go toward helping cover the costs of GED testing. He said it would help people identified by CAPCIL who do not have the $120 for the testing to be able to take the test.

Since some places have trouble finding help, Blankenship said he thought some of the money should be used for workforce development in general. He has not seen the maximum return on investment either.

Because the GPEDC has helped with grants for businesses adding up to well over $100,000 this year, Davenport said she wanted to at least donate $2,500 to them. She said the board could reevaluate this in six months.

Though getting grant money is nice, Sanders said getting businesses is nicer. He wants to know if the county is getting its money.

Blankenship asked whether being part of the GPEDC gives the county access to grants they do not have access to any other way. With the amount of money the county gives them, Blankenship thinks we might have been better off hiring a private grant writer.

With more staff in the GPEDC, Logan County Highway Engineer Bret Aukamp said there are more people to keep an eye on things. That seems to give them access to more grants.

The GPEDC covers a wide market area in Illinois, so Welch said being a part of it helps keep the county in the areas they market. She would at least like to keep a relationship with the GPEDC.

Aukamp said maybe the GPEDC could report to the board to show what they have been involved in. They could also share the advantages of being a part of the organization. That way the board could become more familiar with the GPEDC and decide whether investing in it is worth it.

Because Davenport does get emails from their director, she said she would start sending them to the board. Then they could decide if the information they shared applies to the county.

After Wessbecher attended the January roundtable the GPEDC was a part of, he has not seen any results from them. Wessbecher feels we should see where the county is at in six months.

Hepler said keeping some relationship with the GPEDC through a small donation and using the rest to help local people is good. He hopes six months from now the GPEDC is more responsive.

The board approved removing $5,000 for the GPEDC from the budget. They then approved the amendment to put $2,500 in for the GPEDC and put $2,500 for an account for necessary education.

• Halpin’s amendment to reduce a line item in the Circuit Clerk’s budget from $19,000 to $10,000. The amount in the current budget was $10,000. This amendment passed with 8 yeses and Hepler abstaining.

• Hepler’s amendment to reduce a line item from $65,000 to $64,869 at the request of the Probation Officer.

• Hepler’s amendment to reduce two line items in the assessor’s budget and move them into the salary line item.

The one for extra help was reduced from $2,000 to $0 and the one for appraisal software from $10,000 to $8,000. The $4,000 moved over to the salary line will allow for the increases made when employees in that office completed trainings.

• A line item the County Clerk’s budget was increased from $3,000 to $10,000.

To cover that increase, Hepler said $1,800 from the indigent burial fund would be transferred. That fund has not been used in a few years and Hepler said the Veteran’s Assistance Commission might be able to cover those costs.

With fewer election judges being needed in the upcoming elections, Hepler said that fund could also be decreased and transferred to cover part of the increase.

Davenport asked what that amount would be reduced from.

Since Hepler said $5,000 would be needed out of it, the amount in the election judge fund was decreased from $46,000 to $41,000.

These transfers were approved.

Other discussions:

Since some departments included salary increases in their budgets, there was some discussion at the board workshop about a stipend for those who did not get increases. However, right now, Hepler said it does not sound like a mechanism for doing that.

The county will likely be getting $75,000 more from the CARES Act grant than originally expected, so Davenport asked if the board could reevaluate a COLA increase in six months. Two percent for the non-union employees would add up to around $50,000.

Because expenses cannot be more in six months than they are now, Thomas said they would have to find somewhere to take the money from to add to the salary lines. Thomas will check with the auditor about putting the amount in a contingency line.

Hepler then motioned to put $25,000 in a contingency line. It passed 6-3 with Estill, Blankenship and Halpin voting no.

After all the motions and amendments were voted on, the FY 2020/21 Budget was approved.

The budget began on Dec. 1.

The audited amount from 2019 rolling over into the new budget is $1,610,660.

The difference between revenues and expenses is an $873,754 deficit. The budgeted fund balance for the end of 2020 and beginning of 2021 is $736,906.

The change in the fund balance with the difference between revenues and expenses is projected to be a $1,182,174 deficit, so the final budgeted amount for 2021 has a $445,268 deficit.

Thomas said this last figure does not include either the money that is expected to come back from departments at the end of the year or the CARES money the county would be getting, which when those are in would provide a positive budget.

Once the audited balance comes in next spring the numbers may be better. For example, last spring, the FY 2019/20 budget was showing a $1.4 million deficit without the fund balance. After then Finance Chairman Chuck Ruben figured in the audited balance at just over $2,050,000, it brought the current budget to a positive balance of around $650,000, before getting anything back from departments.

The audits for 2018 and 2019 have shown significant revenues to be rolled into the next year’s budgets. The figures represent building permits for large projects such as the Mount Pulaski Whitney Hill and the Sugar Creek One wind farms, which due to the unpredictability of when those projects would begin were not budgeted. While the bulk amounts in any one year from wind farms come from one-time building permit fees, once in operation every wind turbine will bring in significant annual revenues based on Megawatts produced.

Of special note, permit fees in the amount of $250,000 for a projected solar farm project are included in the FY 2021 Budget.

[Angela Reiners]