ALLEGANY
June 15, 2010
** APPROVED
Legislators Present
D.
Burdick, D. Cady, C. Crandall, P. Curran, D. Fanton, M. Healy, T. Hopkins, K.
LaForge, A. McGraw, D. Pullen, F. Sinclair, N. Ungermann (Absent: G. Benson, T. O’Grady, D. Russo)
Others Present
M.
Alger, K. Dirlam, J. Foels, J. Margeson, T. Miner, B. Riehle, T. Ross
Media Present
D.
Roorbach –
Chairman’s Opening Statement
Chairman
Report on Previous Allegany
County Administrator/Budget Officer
John Margeson stated that for the last seven or eight years the
Mr. Margeson thanked County
Treasurer
In 2001,
Mr. Margeson then referred to a
table showing a 21-year history of property tax rates and changes in those
rates and levies. Mr. Margeson noted
that in 1990, the percentage of change in the tax levy was 7.62 percent, but
there was a $14 decrease in the tax rate per thousand of assessed value because $2.8 million was taken
from unappropriated unreserved fund balance to keep taxes down. Allegany County’s tax rate went down for 12
years in a row even though the tax levy increased every year but one because
the Board decided to take money from the unappropriated unreserved fund balance
and apply it to the operating budget as a revenue to keep taxes down. In 2003, the fund balance became
depleted. In 2004, we were hit hard with
unexpected and high expenses from the retirement system, child health plus,
Medicaid costs, and health care for our own employees. In 2004, we passed along a tax increase of
22.47 percent ($2.42 increase in tax rate).
The Legislature decided they needed to take drastic action to get back
in the black, and this is when we increased our sales tax rate to 4.5 percent
which resulted in approximately $1.8 million in revenue.
2009 Year-End Fiscal Presentation
The 2009 County operating budget called
for $82.06 million and we spent $84.61 million.
The revenues were budgeted at $82.06 million, and we received $90.03
million resulting in an overall surplus of $5.4 million at the end of
2009. This increased our unreserved fund
balance to $12.71 million.
Spending exceeded the 2009 Budget in
the following areas:
·
Food Stamp Cash
Out ($3,171,259)
·
State Fuel Crisis
(HEAP) ($3,110,505)
·
Health – Nurses ($ 269,603)
·
Medical
Assistance ($
240,265)
Mr. Margeson noted that no local
dollar contributions were used for the Food Stamp Cash Out or State Fuel Crisis
expenses because they were reimbursed at 100 percent. The overage for the Health – Nurses category occurred
because there was a delay in the NYS Department of Health, and our CHHA
(Certified Home Health Agency) license did not get transferred to the company
that purchased it until mid-2009, and we continued to provide some services
until the transfer was final. Under the
Medical Assistance category, we pay for Medicaid on a weekly basis, and we
budgeted with the assumption that we would make 52 payments, but we actually
made 53 because of the way the calendar fell.
Spending was less than the 2009 Budget
in the following areas:
·
Special Education
·
Aid to Dependent
Children $ 496,379
·
Child Care $
433,692
·
Risk Retention
(Insurance) $ 233,500
Revenues exceeded the 2009 Budget in
the following areas:
·
·
Refund Prior Year
–
·
Child Care
$ 425,967
Mr. Margeson indicated that we did
not budget anything for the
Mr. Margeson showed a pie chart
summarizing how the $84.6 million in expenses was spent in 2009:
·
Social Services $38,227,754 45.18 percent
·
Public Works $10,229,134 12.09 percent
·
Employee Benefits $ 8,514,568 10.06
percent
·
Miscellaneous $ 7,917,974 9.36 percent
·
Sheriff/Jail $ 6,819,150 8.06 percent
·
Health Department $ 4,491,409 5.31 percent
·
General
Government $ 3,298,201 3.90 percent
·
Debt Service $ 2,515,550 2.97 percent
·
Mental Health $ 2,605,037 3.08 percent
Mr. Margeson also showed a pie chart
summarizing where the $90 million in revenues was derived in 2009:
·
Real Property Tax $25,019,762 27.79 percent
·
Federal Aid $22,177,374 24.63 percent
·
Sales Tax $17,067,776 18.96 percent
·
State Aid $11,787,754 13.09 percent
·
Miscellaneous-Other
Revenue $ 6,794,777 7.55 percent
·
Departmental
Income $ 4,901,190 5.44 percent
·
Housing/Transport
Inmates $ 2,286,563 2.54 percent
Questions & Comments Regarding
Budget Presentation
Legislator Norman Ungermann asked
what year the County received money for selling the nursing services. County Treasurer
Legislator Ungermann stated that
expenditures have gone up $20 million since 2001 so we ought to have some
reserve. The tax levy has gone up
approximately 75 percent, and the tax rate is up almost 50 percent over what it
was in 2001. We collected a lot more money
from the taxpayer, and there are a lot of disgruntled taxpayers who say enough
is enough. Mr. Ungermann stated that we
have the reputation of being the highest taxed county compared to assessed
valuations in the country, and it’s nothing to be proud of. It all looks rosy, but there have been some
huge increases that have hit the taxpayer awfully hard. Mr. Margeson stated that the tax rate went
down for 12 years in a row, and you cannot do that without some type of
backlash.
Budget Committee Chairman Theodore
Hopkins stated if we had held our tax rate the same, we would actually be at
$38 per $1,000 of assessed value, which is higher than we are now. Legislator
Mr. Margeson stated that one of the
reasons the Chairman called the meeting was to develop a strategic plan for the
use and maintenance of our fund balance.
Mr. Margeson stated it would be wise for this Board to talk about ways
in which we can prepare a strategic plan for the potential use and improvement
of the fund balance. How much fund
balance is enough?
Financing of Courthouse Project
Mr. Margeson introduced the County’s
financial advisor, Jeff Smith, President of Municipal Solutions. Mr. Smith congratulated Mr. Margeson, Ms.
Ross, and Mr. Miner on marketing bonds for the Courthouse Project. Mr. Smith stated if you can get yourself in
better financial condition, money will follow money. The Courthouse Project was very controversial,
and we wracked our brains on how to finance the project at the least cost to
the County. We investigated various
options. We heard about a county bond
pool which used some of the stimulus program on a pool basis for counties
across the state. We watched as that
program evolved, and things worked out perfectly for
Financial Ratings
Mr.
Smith stated that because of the County’s past financial position, he thought
we may have to buy bond insurance which would have cost about $65,000, plus the
County would have to pledge as backup security our federal and state
receivables. Mr. Smith indicated in
previous years,
Now
that
Financial
Planning
Mr.
Smith talked about five-year planning and budgeting. Mr. Smith stated that we will also need to
determine how the health care bill will impact future budgets.
Mr.
Smith suggested using our fund balance for tax stabilization, economic
development, and a strategic investment in infrastructure. Mr. Smith talked about the importance of
letting Senator Schumer know the needs of
Chairman
Crandall stated that
Mr.
Smith suggested that a fund balance should be a minimum of 10 percent with a
goal of 20 percent of total operating appropriations minus debt service. Mr. Smith stated that when you do long-range
planning, you set goals and strive, and once you start visualizing, you start
actualizing. Legislator
Legislator
Donald Cady also expressed concern about budgeting for union contracts. Ms. Ross stated that a liability is booked so
that if contracts are settled the County will be able to meet its
obligations.
Chairman
Crandall stated that Mr. Smith talked about leveraging dollars for
infrastructure and economic development, and he wonders if there is a good systematic
way of leveraging funds for projects or investments. Mr. Smith stated that capital budgeting is a
good way to start. Mr. Smith suggested
getting together and identifying what is out there and what
Chairman
Crandall asked if there is a reasonable formula or thought behind what kinds of
reserves, or monies should be kept. Mr.
Smith indicated that adequate reserves should be established for the nuts and
bolts reserves like compensated absences and retirement costs. The economic development reserves are more of
a consensus and working with your local communities. Mr. Smith stated that the
Board as a group must come up with goals that can be focused on. Mr. Smith recommended using any available
resources that can be mustered stating that the County should look for partners
and linkages. Sometimes towns can pitch
in, and inter-municipal cooperation agreements sometimes work.
County Treasurer
Legislator Pullen expressed concern about the likelihood
of a surplus going forward because some of our revenues were one-time,
non-recurring, and we will be facing some increases in other areas like pension
costs and health reform costs as well as sudden turnarounds that we have not
anticipated. County Administrator/Budget
Officer John Margeson cautiously predicts that we will have a budget surplus in
2010 based on what we are seeing half way through the year. There was a brief discussion on the
uncertainty of the state budget. Mr.
Smith indicated that he could convert our 1989 dollars to current-year dollars
so that a more accurate comparison can be made between the two years. Mr. Smith stated that taxes are going up too
much – it’s
Legislator Pullen stated that our taxes are way too high,
and everyone agrees, but what do we do about it? Legislator
Legislator Healy indicated that he would like to see us
hold our increases below the national average of what costs are. Legislator Fanton commented that with
Medicaid and retirement costs, to realistically think you can keep the levy
below
Mr.
Smith encouraged the Board to get some things done at Crossroads. A truck stop is like a godsend; revenues that
come in from field tax are phenomenal.
Chairman
Crandall stated that a list was established when we were looking for projects
for stimulus funding. County Planner
Legislator
David Pullen stated that less than 19 percent of
Highway Infrastructure and Bridge Progra
Legislator David Pullen stated that under the County’s
Bridge Program, it costs approximately $400,000 for each bridge that needs to
be replaced. The average useful life of
a bridge is approximately 40 years. To
keep up, we need to do about eight bridges a year, and we have not been keeping
up with that. We should be budgeting
approximately $3.2 million every year to keep up with our bridges. This is going to catch up with us and bite
us. We need to restructure and look at
some things. If we are going to be
putting something in to help local communities, it is not inappropriate to ask
local communities to also increase their commitments.
Legislator Sinclair stated that there may be programs
down the pike that we should be ready for, so it could be very important to
have our bridges prepped and ready to go so that we could compete for federal
programs if they become available.
Perhaps we may be able to make up some of the projects that have been
neglected. This makes sense and would be
a good solid investment. Legislator
Fanton stated that he certainly thinks it’s a good idea to talk with the
Highway Association. We must also look
at the usage of bridges and how many people they are serving.
Legislator Fanton stated that the state mandates were
never made public so that people realized the increases we were faced
with. Those mandates should be made
public so people know where the real problems are. Legislator Cady indicated that when we begin
developing the 2011 budget, the public may insist we take money from our fund
balance to lower taxes, but if we have the funding of reserves marked for
different things, it will be easier to justify.
Federal Highways
Legislator Pullen stated that we do not have roads that
are eligible for federal funding, and we cannot even afford to design the roads
according to federal regulations let alone build them. To qualify for funding, you usually have to
have a federally qualified road. No town
or village roads would qualify. How can
we get ourselves on those lists? Mr.
Smith stated that
NYS DEC Public Hearing on Wood Burning Furnaces
Future Meetings
Chairman Crandall summarized that in talking about
capital project budgeting, we need to also talk about economic development. Part of this is already being worked on, and
it just needs to be firmed up and put in presentable form. We need to identify projects and prioritize,
establish funds for projects, and identify the impact of projects. On the infrastructure side, our Public Works
Department already has a list. For tax
stabilization, we need to set goals and look at three and five years out. We
can do some projections, and see how we want to fund things. Committees can start to gel some things up
and bring them back for further discussion.
Adjournment
A motion was made by Legislator Fanton, seconded by
Legislator Burdick, and carried to adjourn the meeting at
Respectfully
submitted,
Brenda
Rigby Riehle, Clerk of the Board
Allegany