Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout032-04 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 BUDGET AMENDMENT WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, meeting in regular session and public hearing held on January 14,2004, took the following action: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors that the FY 2003- 2004 Budget be Amended to Reflect: A Landfill Fund Supplemental Appropriation in the Amount of $950,000. This Amount Represents the Need to Purchase Two Pieces of Heavy Equipment for the Landfill. School Construction Fund Supplemental Appropriation in the Amount of $850,898. This Amount Represents Land Purchase and Some Initial Design/Scoping Services for the 11 th Elementary School. ADOPTED, this 14th day ofJanuary, 2004. Upon motion made by Lynda J. Tyler and seconded by W. Harrington Smith, Jr., the above was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Lynda. Tyler Aye Barbara E. Van Osten Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gina A. Forrester Aye A COPY TESTE: Resolution No.: 032-04 Original: Cheryl B. Shiffler, Finance Director cc: C. William Orndoff, Jr., Treasurer Resolution - FY 2003-2004 Budget Amendment Board of Supervisors Meeting of January 14, 2004 Page 2 Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Public Works Director Dr. William C. Dean, Superintendent, Frederick County Schools Lisa K. Frye, School Finance Director COUNTY of FREDERICK :MEMORANDUM Department of Public Works 540/665.5643 FAX: 540/678.0682 TO: Landfill Oversight Committee Members FROM: Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Jr., P.E., Director of Public Works~t.! SUBJECT: Landfill Oversight Committee Report for Meeting of December 8. 2003 DA TE: December 8, 2003 The landfill oversight committee met on Monday. December 8, 2003. at 8:00 a;m. All committee members were present except Jim Wilson and Mike Noel. The following issues were discussed: 1. Proposed Equipment Purchase: The Landfill Manager, Mr. Steve Frye, requested approval to purchase two (2) new pieces of heavy equipment: a 50 ton trash compactor and a 35 ton rock truck. These two (2) pieces of equipment had previously been recommended in a report prepared by SCS Engineers as essential to improving our landfill operations. Costs for these items have been estimated at $570,000 and $380,000 for the trash compactor and rock truck, respectively. A motion was made by Gary Lofton and seconded by Dave Ash to endorse the purchase of the 50 ton trash compactor and 35 ton rock truck. AIl estimated supplemental appropriation of $950,000 will be required to fund these purchases. A public hearing will be required because the budget change exceeds $500,000. 2. Fiscal Year 2004/2005 Budget Proposal: A total budget of$6,327 ,638 is proposed for the landfill for Fiscal Year 2004/2005. In keeping with previous budgets, this budget amount is being driven by the estimated revenue rather than expenditures. The difference has been included in the reserve for contingency line item. Basically. the budget is being provided for infonnation only. Final approval will be required from eacb respective jurisdiction before adoption. 3. Closed Session: A closed session was convened in accordance with the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-37.11, Subsection (A)3 to discuss the acquisition or disposition of rea! estate related to landfill expansion. HES/rls cc: file 107 North Kent Street. Wmcbester, Virginia 22601.5000 YFrederick County Public Schools' 7 . ... to ensure all students an excellent education Superintendent of Schools cleanW@frederick.k12.vaus , F ~u Memor~ DATE: December 9, 2003 FROM: John Riley, County Administrator William C. Dean, Ph.D., superu{1li?ctent , TO: RE: APPROPRIATION FOR THE 11th ELEMENTARY SCHOOL On October 3, 2003, you, Dick Shickle, and Cheryl Shiffler met with Lisa Frye and me regarding a proposed method of appropriating funds for the school construction fund. We discussed and left with you a detailed memo outlining the proposal. It is my understanding that the three of you would give further thought to the proposal and get back to us with a plan of action on how to proceed. At the meeting, Usa described our need to have appropriation in FY2004 for the 11th elementary school. It was anticipated that the land purchase would be made during FY2003 and therefore was not budgeted in FY2004. As you' are aware, we are getting closer to a commitment for the land and will need, at a minimum, the available bond funds to be appropriated. If you have considered the altemative method of appropriating the construction fund, the amount would be either: · )> $10,800,000 which is the total project cost, or )> $850;898 which is the amount of bond funds plus accumulated interest through June 30, 2003, and would allow for the land purchase and some initial design/ scoping services. The altemative method of appropriating the construction fund is based on a level of commitment to a project and is not hinged on expenditures in a fiscal year period. This method enables all reporting and communipations to be simplified. Please refer to the previous detailed memo further explaining the advantages (enclosed). Please let me know your collective thoughts from our October 3rd meeting and advise - on how to proceed with requesting appropriation. I will ask Lisa to request placement on the county finance committee agenda for December 17, 2003 and subsequent supervisor meeting January 14, 2004 unless I am advised differently by you. Enclosure pc: Lisa Frye, Director of Finance AI Omdorff, Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent 1415 Amherst SIree1 P.O. Box 3508 Wmchester, VnginiB 22604-2546 -"*.frederick.k12.va.us 54l).662.3888 fax 540-722-2788 ~rederick County Public Schoo's ~ ... to ensure all students an excellent education DirecItr of Fmanc:e fryel@lfrederickJ::12..va.us DATE: October 3,2003 TO: Richard C. Sbickle, Chairman, Board of Supervisors John R. Riley, County Administrator THROUGH: William C. Dean, Ph.D., superintendelt'fj- FROM: . Lisa K. FIye, Director of Financ~K RE: Appropriation Approval for Construction Fund Projects The cu.ttent method of appropriation for the School Construction Fund is cumbersome and lacks meaning in relation to the balance of a construction project. Appropriation in a budget year is based on projected activity for that period of time, not for the whole project Variances occur due to the timing of such actions as site selection, construction contract award, construction schedules, transfer of ownership of the building and delivery of goods. The county's audited. financial report, as well as the school's published budget, explains the project cost, but the total appropriation and associated remaining balances on the general ledger are misleading. I recommend transitioning to an appropriation that is tied to an approved construction project amount, not an annual twelve-month fiscal year projection. The approval of the project cost and associated. appropriation by the board of supervisors under this method would occur initially upon approval of project, which mayor may not be at the same time as the annual budget approval At the beginning of each subsequent fiscal year, the governing body would approve appropriation equal to the amount of unspent appropriation from the previous fiscal year, ie. a rolling approval of unspent project funds. The school construction fund contains multiple projects, but each project is accounted for separately. The school system. can provide a running total of project expenditures, both spent and encumbered, at anytime. Attached is an opinion letter from the county's audit firm, which states that "this proposed change is appropriate and should simplify project financial reporting." Since the date of this letter, I met with both Randy Jones of Robinson, Farmer, Cox and with Cheryl Shiffler. We want to take all steps necessary to ensure complete understanding of the recommendation. To accomplish the transition, the appropriation in FY04 for the fourth middle school could be removed and replaced with appropriation equal to the total project cost less expenditures to date. So, if we determine the total project cost estimate is $26.5 million, we would ask the governing body to approve appropriation equal to $26.5 million less all expenditures through June 30, 2003. Once complete, the school system would be set to encumber and/or spend as needed for the remaining course of the project _ regardless of the fiscal year in which the expenditure is made. If the project total needs to be revised, a separate approving action would be needed by the governing body. It should also be noted that the debt issues would still be approved through the prescribed process as required by VPSA Other projects would be appropriated, in whole or in part, as each project becomes ready to proceed. I believe this recommendation would indeed simplify the reporting process; therefore, helping all involved to feel more comfortable with the decision making process. I look forward to your feedback and response. Thank you for your consideration. Sample wording for the supplemental appropriation each fiscal year: An increase of $XXX million in the School Construction Fund appropriation is due to project balances being carried forward and reallocated in FY200X. Total project costs for multiyear construction projects are allocated when ~e jobs are contracted and unspent balapces are carried forward into future fiscal years until the projects are complete. Sample wording for the annual budget resolution: Appropriations designated for capital projects will not lapse at the end of the fiscal year, but shall remain appropriations until the completion of the project or until the Board of Supervisors, by appropriate ordinance or resolution, changes or eliminates the appropriation.