MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
DECEMBER 7, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
FY11 Department Budgets...................................................................................................... 1
Auditor/Accounting (03).............................................................................................. 1
Central Services (18).................................................................................................. 9
Elections (33)........................................................................................................... 21
Insurance (22).......................................................................................................... 25
Institutional Accounts (41)......................................................................................... 27
Proposed 2% Budget Reduction................................................................................. 29
FY 2011 County Budget........................................................................................................ 29
Chairperson Neuzil called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building at 9:02 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Janelle Rettig, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
First Deputy Auditor Chris Edwards remarked that County Auditor Tom Slockett regrets he could not be in attendance due to attending an elections meeting in Kansas City. Slockett told him he will be happy to talk to the Board members later in the week to answer any questions.
Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne said the overall budget for the County Auditor's Office is actually decreasing and asked Deputy Auditor Dana Aschenbrenner to discuss some of those changes. Aschenbrenner said some of the changes from the current year include a slight increase of approximately 5% in stationary and forms from FY09. He reported that plat books increased by approximately $750. Stutsman asked if the Auditor's Office is planning to start selling plat books. Deputy Auditor Mark Kistler confirmed this and said there are two plat books available. Additional plat books are being ordered from a private plat book company and will include owners plus residents and sell for about $20. The Auditor's Office is also printing their own, which will be more up to date but include owners only. The cost will be about $14. Stutsman asked if that will be reported as revenue. Kistler said yes, for both of them.
Aschenbrenner said he thinks the expense for maps and Johnson County atlases is shifting out of the Auditor's Office. Stutsman responded that she thinks it was decided that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Division will charge for those. Kistler agreed and said there was a pass through of the revenue and expenses they were offsetting because they were paying for the maps and then receiving money for them, so this expense was just zeroed out in the budget. Harney asked if the maps will now be distributed through the GIS Division or through the Auditor’s Office. Kistler said the maps will be located in the Auditor’s Office, but maps can also be available in other offices if money does not have to be collected. Aschenbrenner asked if the Johnson County atlases are also shifting over to the GIS Division. Kistler responded that the atlases are done.
Aschenbrenner remarked he increased the budget for data processing supplies by $3,000 over FY10. The line has been under budgeted for the past three years. Actual expenses for the past three years were $5,700 for FY07, $4,900 for FY08, and almost $8,400 for FY09. The current budget is only $3,300 so the amount for FY11 was increased. Stutsman asked what is included in data processing supplies. Aschenbrenner said toner and similar items.
Aschenbrenner said the amount for minor equipment has also been increased. It also seems to be under budgeted, based on past actual expenses, although it has varied. The last three actual expenses were $1,200 for FY07, $1,700 for FY08, and then only $300 for FY09. He reported that he reduced the amount for the miscellaneous/other line, based on actual activity. The official publications line was decreased by $4,000, based on actual expenses for the three most recent years. Rettig asked why the actual expenses for FY08 were so high. Aschenbrenner said he is unsure and would need to look into it because he is not sure which publications go through that line. Edwards said it probably includes job advertisements. Aschenbrenner said those can vary widely from year to year because they are not routine publications. Deputy Auditor Casie Parkins said they do not include the Board of Supervisor's publications that come out of Department 18. Rettig said she was curious because it’s an anomaly to the two years surrounding it.
Aschenbrenner said the budget for printing and binding services was cut back by $700. There was a large number in FY08. He thinks the expense had to do with binding of real estate documents and asked if Kistler recalls the reason. Kistler said it may have involved tax lists, which are now done electronically. The entire tax list was previously printed, and he thinks the expense may be related to that.
Aschenbrenner said that the next change involves telephone costs. He reported that the Auditor's Office is over budget, based on year to date, although he thinks they are finally starting to see some cost reduction due to the change in phone services. Aschenbrenner reported that there are a few minor changes. The line for office equipment non-contract repair was reduced by $100. Service contract repair was reduced by $300. Dues and memberships were increased by $100. Service charges were decreased by $200. Office equipment purchases were decreased by $500. He explained that the Auditor's Office generally purchases office equipment through Capital Expenditure, so this line only involves minor equipment. He concluded that the overall proposed non-personnel decrease from FY10 to FY11 is approximately $5,580. Stutsman said that is good.
Aschenbrenner continued with revenues. He stated that overall projected revenues for FY11 were decreased by $900. The majority of the decrease will be due to the move away from charging for maps. Aschenbrenner said he increased the projected revenue from liquor license fees because he thinks it has been under budgeted from year to year. He said the sale of County atlases has also been zeroed out. He stated that the Auditor’s Office is not a big revenue stream for the County, and the total budgeted revenue for FY11 is projected to be $7,700.
Aschenbrenner said $5,000 was earmarked for capital expenditures in FY10 for the replacement of the copier in the Auditor’s Office. He said servicing of the copier seems to be a regular occurrence. For FY11, the Auditor's Office is asking for the remaining $5,000. A reliable copier can hopefully be found for the central office with the earmarked total of $10,000. Stutsman asked if the Auditor's Office is looking to replace the copier in July of 2010. Aschenbrenner confirmed that the Auditor's Office is hoping to purchase the copier as soon as possible in FY11. Harney asked if the Auditor’s Office has looked into leasing the equipment as opposed to buying it. Aschenbrenner responded that he has not done so personally. His general impression is that leases involve an interest component and generally cost more over the long term. It is a question of whether to finance the purchase. Harney added that it is not going to lower the cost that is currently listed. Aschenbrenner said the initial cash flow is obviously lower because payments are paid on a monthly basis for the term of the lease. At the end of the lease term, there is a generally an option to purchase the leased equipment for a reduced price, but payments would obviously have been paid on top of that over the years.
Sullivan said wages are not normally included in the proposed budget, but since they were included, he is going to ask a question about them. He asked if Slockett's salary and the deputy auditors' salaries are being spread across the budgetary departments. Edwards said Slockett's salary is split between Auditor/Accounting Department 03 and Elections Department 33. The salaries of the four accounting deputies are included in Department 03, and the salary of the elections deputy is included in Department 33. Aschenbrenner agreed.
Parkins said she has a decision package for the Minutes Division. She said the decision package was presented in the past, but the Auditor's Office is presenting it again this year. The total increase in expenditures would be anywhere between $19,678 and $44,983. In recognition of the County's decision to use committees as a part of the decision making process, utilizing the Auditor's Office to produce minutes would be a consistent, efficient, and cost effective way to facilitate communication because producing minutes is an established function of the Auditor's Office. Parkins said the Auditor's Office is requesting 30 additional hours per week of part-time temporary student recording secretary hours to aid in the production of committee meeting minutes. The employees currently producing committee meeting minutes, including department heads and management staff, are typically paid a much higher hourly wage than recording secretaries who are paid only $10 per hour. She thinks it would be more cost effective for the County to have the Auditor’s Office complete committee meeting minutes on a per request basis for the various County boards and committees, including but not limited to: the Space Needs Committee, the Parking Committee, the Communications Committee, the Employee Handbook Committee, and the Safety Committee.
Parkins said the Auditor's Office would also like to add a half-time permanent Administrative Secretary/Account Clerk II position, which would be a half-time equivalent of Administrative Secretary/Account Clerk II Nancy Tomkovicz's position, if the committee meeting requests increased to the point of receiving too many that the part-time employees couldn't take care of them all. The non-personnel costs would be about $1,800 for a computer with Microsoft Office and Exchange. The other job title would be temporary student recording secretary. At 30 hours per week, the wages and benefits would amount to about $17,878. If the part-time permanent administrative secretary/account clerk II is needed, the cost would be about $25,305 for wages and benefits.
Parkins indicated that the proposed part time student recording secretaries would have the same duties as the existing recording secretaries, but the function would expand to include committee meeting minutes. The duties include attending meetings as needed, summarizing meeting minutes, reviewing and editing draft minutes, and other clerical duties as assigned. The part-time permanent administrative secretary/account clerk II position would only be filled if the number of requests for committee meeting minutes increased to the point that the existing full-time administrative secretary/account clerk II needed assistance in coordinating the work of the part time temporary recording secretaries.
Parkins said the part-time administrative secretary/account clerk II would have the same duties as the full time administrative secretary/account clerk II, which include acting as the lead worker for part-time temporary recording secretaries in the production of minutes, attending meetings as needed, summarizing meeting minutes, and reviewing and editing draft minutes produced by the part-time student recording secretaries. She said the change would involve an expansion of existing duties into a new area. The Auditor's Office currently completes this function for the Board of Supervisors and are also now doing so for the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee (CJCC) meetings that do not include attendance by the Board. Neuzil said the meetings now always include attendance by the Board.
Parkins responded to the question of how the new positions will further the goals and objectives of the Auditor's Office. She said producing minutes is already an established function of the Auditor's Office. In recognition of the County's decision to use committees as part of the decision making process, utilizing the Auditor's Office to produce those minutes would be a consistent, efficient, and cost effective way to facilitate communication. She said higher paid staff persons will continue to spend time preparing committee meeting minutes if these positions are not approved. Within Minutes, there is currently one deputy auditor, a full time administrative secretary/account clerk II, and 40 hours per week of part-time temporary recording secretaries.
Parkins said FY99 was the last time a position was added to Minutes. At that time, a full-time recording secretary position was added, and the part-time temporary recording secretary hours were reduced. She stated that in FY04, the part time temporary recording secretary hours were removed due to the 4% across the board budget cuts. In FY06, 20 part-time temporary recording secretary hours were granted back to Minutes. In FY08, 20 additional part-time hours were reallocated from the Real Estate Division of the Auditor's Office. That change returned Minutes staffing to its status prior to the 4% budget cut.
Parkins responded to the question regarding whether the department has explored other options to handle the workload besides adding additional staff. She said they have attempted to respond to requests to take minutes for committee meetings in the past, but they had to decline as additional requests were made because it became apparent that Minutes was not staffed accordingly. Parkins said a breakdown of costs by line item is listed.
Stutsman asked if the Auditor's Office made this same request for FY10. Parkins responded no, the request was made the previous year. Rettig asked Parkins if the Auditor's Office takes minutes for Board meetings and the CJCC meetings. Parkins said there have been a couple of CJCC meetings, which did not include the Board, for which the Auditor's Office took minutes. Now that the Board attends all CJCC meetings, the Auditor's Office will do the minutes because they are considered Board meetings. Rettig asked if it is the responsibility of the Auditor’s Office to prepare minutes for all Board meetings. Parkins said yes, it is required by law. Rettig asked if minutes for other meetings are done on a case by case basis. Parkins confirmed that the Auditor's Office has been asked to do so before. They have done so a few times, but it takes a lot of time to complete additional minutes.
Rettig asked if Minutes has the equivalent of 3 FTEs, consisting of a deputy auditor, a full-time recording administrative secretary/account clerk II, and 40 hours of temporary part-time help. Parkins said the temporary employees are paid a much lower wage than the full-time staff. Rettig said the decision package information states 40 hours per week. Stutsman asked if the part-time temporary recording secretaries all work 40 hours per week. Parkins said Minutes is currently a little understaffed. She has been trying to hire, but she has not been getting any applications. Parkins said she normally hires students up to 40 hours per week. For example, one person may want to work 11 hours per week, and another person may want to work only five hours per week. The Auditor's Office might have several part-time temporary student recording secretaries, but they do not work more than a total of 40 hours per week.
Stutsman asked how it would be handled, now that there is significant more meeting space, if multiple meetings occurred at the same time and the Auditor's Office took meeting minutes. Parkins responded that the Auditor's Office would have part-time employees staff the meetings. Stutsman asked if part-time employees are able to do so. Parkins said yes and indicated that part-time Recording Secretary Meaghan Mercer is currently staffing this meeting. Stutsman said she thought they just transcribed meetings. Parkins said no.
Sullivan said he understands the idea of having lower paid employees doing clerical tasks; however, employees who currently take minutes for committee meetings do not get paid extra for doing so. They may work a longer week, but they do not get additional pay. He thinks the people taking minutes are salaried employees in most cases, and the County is not actually paying out more money. However, the employees could be leaving other tasks undone, although he doubts it. Sullivan said he thinks the individuals are just working a little harder. Stutsman said she thinks communication may be part of their job description in Human Resources. Parkins agreed that it is already in the job duties for the individuals taking minutes for the Conservation Board, Public Health Board, and all of the Planning and Zoning Committees.
Neuzil said he thinks the issue has to do with maintaining an expected level of service. He indicated that a different level of service is provided when the Auditor's Office prepares minutes than when they are done more generically. However, it boils down to what is a necessity.
Rettig asked how long it takes to prepare the minutes for a meeting that is one hour long, and if it is hour for hour. Parkins responded no. The time depends on who is typing the minutes and who is reviewing them. She said it probably takes a person who is fully trained and competent about 3.5 hours to prepare the minutes for one hour of a meeting. Rettig asked if it would take about 45 hours to complete the minutes for a week of Board meetings totaling 10 hours in length. Parkins said it depends on the type of meetings and the issues discussed; all meetings are a little different.
Stutsman said she thinks the Board needs to be cognizant of that and of the time spent in Board meetings. She said there was a time when the Board included Supervisors who talked a lot, and the budget for the Auditor's Office increased accordingly. She does not want to advocate cutting discussions down, but she thinks the Board should be more aware of the issue. Neuzil agreed and said there are a lot of questions that can be asked and answered outside the Board Room. Rettig said she disagrees because the Board is supposed to do their business in public, and questions should be asked and answered during public meetings. Harney said the conversation may be extensive if is the Board wants to understand something. Stutsman responded that is not what she is saying, but the Board can sometimes ramble on in discussions, and they need to be aware of it.
Sullivan said he thinks the biggest advantage to having the Auditor’s Office responsible for committee meeting minutes is that the minutes would get out on the calendar for Board agendas and minutes that is located on the web page for the Auditor's Office. He thinks people go to the web page when they are looking for minutes. Stutsman said she does not want Board meeting minutes to be confused with committee meeting minutes. She asked if Sullivan is referring to committee meeting minutes. Sullivan said yes, but he thinks they may be of interest to the public. It would be nice for the public to be able to find them. He thinks constituents currently have to visit one of the County buildings to find the right person to ask. He does think convenience has to be balanced with cost, however.
Stutsman said the County may need to make better use of their webmaster, which is something that could be done. Harney said the bottom line is that the change would involve a cost of $45,000. Parkins responded that a lower cost is anticipated, and the full $45,000 would not be utilized unless there are too many requests to handle only with additional part time staff.
Rettig said Minutes currently has 120 hours per week budgeted for taking minutes, and Parkins previously indicated that each meeting hour equates to 4.5 hours of work. Parkins said she has duties other than taking minutes, and she is not really included in the Minutes part, although she is the Minutes Deputy. Rettig asked Parkins if her other duties do not include minutes. Parkins said she does some minutes, but she has a lot of other duties besides preparing minutes. Rettig asked Parkins what part of her job is minutes. Parkins said she staffs the department, but she also does billing for publications, the Compensation Board, and many other duties as assigned. She also serves as Slockett's assistant. She said all 40 hours of Tomkovicz's job involve completing minutes. Rettig said if she figures 80 hours of Minutes staff per week and divides it by 4.5, she gets 17.7 hours of meetings per week that are already budgeted for. Kistler indicated that Minutes employees have other duties, including filing, preparing publications, and other tasks. Parkins agreed that there are many duties within Minutes besides preparing minutes. Rettig said she did not include any of Parkins’ hours though. Kistler said Parkins does not do filing. Parkins agreed that she does not do filing or clerical work.
Edwards said the Auditor's Office does have a second decision package for a half-time regular account clerk II position for the Accounting Division. The duties of the new position would include performing portions of the payroll and/or accounts payable functions for the County, in addition to other duties within the accounting division. He added that they are expanded duties. Edwards said the payroll and accounts payable functions are essential to the operations of the County. Both areas operate under critical deadlines that cannot be missed. Over the last ten years, as the County's employee base and the overall budget has grown, the workloads of both the payroll clerk and the accounts payable clerk have increased to handle the growth. He said the growth is anticipated to continue in the future. Edwards said the employees have been required to work substantial overtime in recent years to complete all of their work within deadlines. Although necessary, this overtime has put a strain on the employees at times and is not a long term, cost effective solution. He said part time temporary clerks have been utilized in an attempt to ease their workloads, but both functions are somewhat technical and complex. The turnover associated with part time, temporary positions limits the value of training them on payroll and accounts payable. Edwards said the optimal long term solution is to add an additional, regular, ongoing position. The Auditor's Office is proposing the addition of a half-time account clerk II position to handle the extra workload.
Stutsman asked Edwards if he prepared a breakdown of overtime hours versus hiring another person. Some other departments have been able to justify an additional position by showing what has been paid out in overtime. She explained that the information is sometimes helpful for the Board when making this type of decision. Edwards said he doesn’t have the breakdown with him, but he knows the payroll clerk works an average of eight hours of overtime per week. Stutsman asked if that is Account Clerk II Carla Scherbring. Edwards said yes, and the overtime is pretty substantial. Stutsman said she realizes Scherbring has a lot on her plate. She asked if Scherbring has other duties or if she is dedicated to payroll. Edwards said Scherbring is pretty much dedicated to payroll, but her workload does increase during elections because she has to hire a lot of extra people and process the payroll. He said she doesn’t really have time to work in elections, other than on election night.
Sullivan said he knows that all the employees in the Auditor's Office are cross trained to assist with elections, which he thinks is great. He asked if some elections employees could be cross trained to do payroll and accounts payable duties during times that are slow for Elections. Edwards responded that he thinks there are some duties for which current employees could be cross trained. There are also a couple of employees in the Accounting Division who are cross trained in some of the payroll duties and can help out when they have time. Sullivan asked if that is not sufficient. Edwards said no.
Stutsman said Schultz talked about a system in which department heads could automatically enter information. She asked if that system would help with this position. Edwards asked if she is referring to payroll information. Stutsman said yes. Edwards said a lot of the larger departments are already doing that, so he does not perceive that increasing the utilization of that process would make a big difference. Neuzil indicated that there has been discussion regarding whether an increase in employees for some functions at the Joint Emergency Communications Center (JECC) would place additional stress on the accounting side. He asked if anything of that nature has been factored into this request. Edwards stated that they were not sure if that was still being considered. Neuzil responded that it is still being considered. A majority of the Board chose to review it again. He said he was just curious if that had any impact on this request because there would be potential for some revenue to come in from that part of the budget into the Auditor’s portion of the budget. Edwards responded that it will definitely have an impact and will make the need even more critical. They didn’t really factor that into this decision package. He reported that the Auditor's Office already has the need for the new position without this added impact. Neuzil said JECC is willing to pay for those accounting functions to be run out of the County. However, the County is a part of the JECC.
Aschenbrenner reported that the trend of accounts payable claims has trended upwards from year to year, and he expects that to continue. The number of County employees has increased, so the amount of work that payroll has to complete expands. In addition, as budgets continue to expand, there are more bills that need to be processed and paid. Rettig asked how many FTEs are included in the Accounting Division. Edwards stated that he, Aschenbrenner, and five full time account clerk IIs work in the division right now. A part-time student is also employed for filing. He asked Aschenbrenner how many hours the part-time student works. Aschenbrenner said she works no more than 20 hours per week, and probably closer to 10 to 15 hours per week.
Claiborne stated that he and Aschenbrenner went over the budget for Central Services on December 4, 2009 and asked Aschenbrenner to cover the big changes now. Aschenbrenner said the amount paid for the maintenance of grave markers for veterans has decreased slightly based on actual expenses over the last three years. The budget has decreased to $700, and he does not think that amount has been exceeded since FY07. Stutsman asked why this item is in the budget for Central Services budget and not in the budget for Veteran Affairs. Aschenbrenner replied that he does not know; it has always been that way, and he is not sure if it is required. Stutsman asked Aschenbrenner to check into the issue because she is not sure it accurately reflects the budget. Rettig said it’s not that much money, but she finds it interesting that this amount is decreasing while the actual requests for assistance with veteran funerals is going up and a budget amendment was requested.
Aschenbrenner said the next line is Animal Control and involves a reimbursement to the City of Iowa City for County at-large animals. He remarked that this is an expense that has mutated over the years and has gone through various contentious phases. The expenses were rising rapidly over time, and he is not sure about the terms of the current agreement. Aschenbrenner said he knows it was changed to a per animal charge versus an animal day charge. Claiborne said the change has saved the County a lot of money. Aschenbrenner said he knows the County made one payment this year, but he is not sure what time period that the payment was for. He expects the cost to be under $110,000. Aschenbrenner said the original contract required the City of Iowa City to bill the County quarterly, and he doesn’t think they have ever done so. The County was lucky to get one bill a year, and it resulted in sticker shock on a couple of occasions. He thinks it is better managed now, and the billings will hopefully be a little more timely. Just based on what he has seen this year, he expects the cost to be around $75,000, and he carried that amount over for FY11 as well.
Aschenbrenner said he believes the line titled Boards and Commissions for Township Officials pays for the costs associated with township committees or boards. Generally, a large share of that budget has not been exhausted, so it was slightly decreased. It amounted to about $3,000 out of the current $8,000 budget, and that amount was carried over for FY11. Sullivan asked if this one was the first year that the Board gave raises to township officials. Aschenbrenner said he believes so and asked if it was granted in the FY10 budget. He said a large increase in costs has not been seen, based on year to date information. There probably will be a slight increase, however. Sullivan noted that if the County Township Officials meet the exact same amount of hours in FY10 as they did in FY09, the County should see a 15% to 20% increase because of the raise from $10 to $12 per hour. Aschenbrenner said the amount would be similar to that, and he would not expect more than a 20% increase over the previous year.
Claiborne suggested that the Board talk about the non-bargaining merit line and asked if it will be an issue with the new plan. Aschenbrenner said he was told to use the number for FY10. Neuzil reminded Claiborne that it went up from FY09. Claiborne confirmed that it increased from $78,000 to $85,000. Aschenbrenner said he thinks the merit is originally budgeted in Central Services and then placed in the departments that actually pay the merit during the last amendment of the year. Rettig asked if that is why the amount is listed as zero for previous years. Aschenbrenner said yes, the actual expense does not ever flow through Central Services; it is just carved out initially. Neuzil said his concern is that the line item will increase if the County increases the employee pool, such as by hiring additional Sheriff’s deputies. There is no way around it, although savings involving longevity payments will potentially be seen. Neuzil said he thinks Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek should be asked if the County adds more employees to the County, then the Board needs to recalculate that amount. Claiborne asked if the change will be effective for FY11 or FY12. Stutsman answered FY11. She stated she hates to tax for something that has not been established yet. She doesn’t think any decisions have been made regarding whether to include them. She would almost rather leave it the way it is and then take it out of Central Services through amendment if everything falls in place.
Aschenbrenner reported that the next line with any changes is the line titled Miscellaneous Supplies: General County Management. He said that there was very little activity involving that line, so he dropped it down $400 from the current amount of $500.
Aschenbrenner continued with the line titled Supplies: Employee Recognition Board. He said he is guessing that the County will be over budget on this item, and he is not exactly sure what flows through that line. He thinks it may involve plaques and certificates for work anniversaries and those types of things. Stutsman asked if the food comes out of that budget item. Johnson said he thinks there is a separate line for that expense. Claiborne stated that the expense of the Employee Recognition Luncheon comes from the Communications Committee. Stutsman said she was talking about the longevity that is planned for December. Claiborne confirmed that the item comes out of this line.
Aschenbrenner said that he increased a couple of the Minutes budget lines. He said looking at the actual budget expenses for the past two years shows that the lines appear to have been under budgeted. He said he is referring to the Lone Tree Leader and the Solon Economist, in particular. He thinks the Iowa City Press-Citizen line is okay. Harney asked if those costs had been mitigated. Parkins informed the Board that she was going to look into the issue, but she was out of the office on December 3 and 4, 2009 and has not had a chance to do so. She explained that there is a detailed system in the Code of Iowa regarding how it can be done. She said she spoke to Sullivan about obtaining those sections, but she has been gone. Stutsman said she doesn’t think now is the time to add a publication. Sullivan said no, he was just wondering if the other newspaper would be less expensive. Parkins said a determination would also need to be made as to whether or not it would qualify as a County publication, as several components are involved.
Aschenbrenner said he decreased the budget line for Typing, Printing, Binding General County Board line to $0 because there has been no activity during the last three fiscal years. The ACH Processing Charges line involves charges the County started to incur towards the end of the FY09, and there is not currently a budget for the line. He said the projected costs for FY10 are approximately $1,600. He carried that number over to FY11. He thinks Edwards can tell him if the amount is appropriate. Aschenbrenner said the line for Administrative Fees for Flex Benefits involves the amount the paid for someone to administer the flexible benefits program and payments. He said the line appears to be under budgeted.
Aschenbrenner said the next budget increase involves the cost of supplying video for Board meetings. Based on year-to-date figures, he expects the currently budgeted amount of $13,650 to be surpassed. He expects another modest increase over the re-estimate of about $150, for a total of approximately $16,150 for FY11. Aschenbrenner said there is a $2,000 decrease for Planning Consultant/General Management Board. The actual expenses have varied wildly over for the past three years. He projected the FY11 amount to be somewhere in the middle, as opposed to the upper end. He thinks the highest actual cost was in FY08, which was about $9,000. In FY09, however, only approximately $2,000 ran through the account.
Executive Assistant Andy Johnson said there has been discussion in Strategic Planning meetings about revisiting the Strategic Plan. He has not done much investigation into the cost of hiring a consultant, however. Stutsman asked if he thinks the cost would be more than $6,000. Claiborne said there was a large increase in FY08 to $8,930 for services received during FY07 and paid in FY08. He asked if the cost resulted from hiring University of Iowa Institute of Public Affairs Associate Director Jeff Schott for the Strategic Planning project meetings at the Fairgrounds. Claiborne said he and Johnson spoke to Aschenbrenner on December 4, 2009, they discussed the Board would like to have such meetings again and whether they wanted the budgeted amount adjusted. Stutsman said she thinks the Board is due to have someone come in again to lead those meetings.
Neuzil said one idea was to mirror something Linn County recently did, which involved obtaining a clearer picture of what the community wants. He said it would probably involve a discussion regarding what strategy to take. Neuzil stated that he looked at how Linn County put it together in their strategic planning and how they incorporated it into their budget. He thinks it was Rettig who passed around the Linn County budget book with their assessment of finances for the year. He said in Linn County’s budget it could be seen how they had incorporated their strategic planning, and it was well orchestrated. Sullivan said he is a little unsure because there is a tendency to spend the money for this type of consulting work. Then the Board basically feeds the consultant the information, and the consultant then feeds it back. He sometimes wonders if they could do it themselves if they just sat down and did it. However, he is torn on the issue because a different person can sometimes lead people to think differently. Stutsman said so much of that depends on the presenter.
Stutsman said she wonders if the Board should create a schedule to have a top notch person come in every five years. Sullivan said the Board could put away about $2,000 per year, and use it only every third year or so. Johnson reported that Scott County does so every January after an election, which is every other year. Stutsman said that makes sense. Johnson added that Scott County has a specific document that outlines each department's tasks and goals. Stutsman said her observation is that it seems like Johnson Coun ty has never moved to the next level of strategic planning; it has always been very elementary. The Board has never come up with a department delineated plan, like Scott County has. Stutsman said she wonders how much money Linn County and Scott County pay for theirs. She has no idea how much it would cost.
Neuzil said he doesn’t have a problem keeping things as they are, given the direction the Board has given to others to hold the line on additional spending regarding non-personnel issues. Stutsman said she would like to know what an in depth strategic plan would involve. Sometimes she thinks now may be an appropriate time because budgets are really tight and they need to be even more focused on where money is being spent. She would like to get that kind of outcome from a strategic plan. She hasn’t looked at Linn County’s budget book very closely. Neuzil said it is masterful and extremely well done.
Neuzil said one of things the Board has to consider regarding development of a strategic plan, is that they may run into budget issues and have to put things on hold. He thinks they have a pretty good list of things they could focus on, but they can’t if they don’t have any money to do so.
Johnson asked the Board if he should get information from Linn County and Scott County in regards to what they pay and who does their strategic planning. Stutsman replied that she would be interested. Sullivan said he thinks it would be interesting to discuss the topic at the Department Head Meeting on December 15, 2009. He might be interested in hearing their opinions regarding whether it would be worthwhile and if they have any suggestions regarding what has worked in the past. Johnson said okay. Sullivan said they have done it both ways. It has involved elected officials only and both elected officials and department heads.
Aschenbrenner said there is a slight decrease for Property Taxes from the FY10 budget. He expects the County to be a little under on that, based on the first half of the year. This involves County owned properties that are still on the hook for property tax payments.
Aschenbrenner said he projects that Flex Spending Claims are under budget by about $65,000, based on year-to-date activity. The line is generally neutral because there should be offsetting revenue. He was told that is not necessarily the case, however. Employees can get paid for flex spending and leave employment before the money is recouped. The County then takes a loss.
Aschenbrenner said he dropped down audit costs because the new contract with the new auditors is generally less expensive. The cost allocation costs have also decreased as the result of a new contract. He said he was not sure what information to enter for the Profession Fees/Bonding line because he is unsure of the Board’s intent regarding new debt issuance. Stutsman replied that it should come down. Claiborne agreed and said he and County Treasurer Tom Kriz were discussing all of the expenses for the Conservation Bond and will be billing the fund to recapture. Stutsman clarified that he means billing the bond. Claiborne agreed. He said they had processed the claims, but they are going to issue it back to Central Services.
Sullivan asked if the large jump in actual expenses to $127,960 in FY09 was primarily due to the JECC. Aschenbrenner said there was short term bonding for a month or two. Stutsman asked about the Shueyville Road project. Aschenbrenner said that is a decision the Board will have to make. Sullivan mentioned that he would like to see how that bond breaks down. He said people constantly ask what the Conservation Bond and the JECC cost the County. Aschenbrenner said he thinks they technically billed out the JECC during FY10. He thinks their share is about half, although the County pays for all of it eventually. It is just a matter of where it is reflected in the accounts. Stutsman agreed with Sullivan that people want to know how much it is costing.
Aschenbrenner said he reduced the budget for the Johnson County Communications Committee, based on the actual expenses for the past three years. It appears to be slightly over budget but not significantly over budget. Aschenbrenner said he thinks the County is finally seeing some cost savings involving the telephone line. He reduced the telephone budget, based on year-to-date actual expenses. He said that some cost savings are now being realized in the telephone budget. He said the Deputy Line/Clerk of Court line is another telephone expense. He budgeted $1,000 for FY11 for the Safety Committee Speaker Fees because they have generally not seen any actual expenses over $1,000.
Aschenbrenner said he is re-estimating postage for FY10 because it is approximately $20,000 under budget. He carried that amount over for FY11. The amount that will be shared by Elections in FY11 will be significantly lower than in FY10. He believes there is only one election scheduled for FY11 so their postage costs will be significantly lower.
Sullivan asked Aschenbrenner to back up to lines 61 through 64 of the spreadsheet. He asked why those items were included in Central Services rather than Elections or Accounting. He asked what the lines involve. Aschenbrenner said he is not exactly sure what is charged across those lines. Kistler said they involve public notices that the Board directs the Auditor's Office to publish. Stutsman added that they are for Planning and Zoning, public hearings, et cetera. Parkins said they also include Mental Health and Disability Services (MH/DS) public hearing notices and budget amendment notices. Sullivan asked if MH/DS notices should come out of their own budget. Parkins said there are actually only a few departments that are expected to pay for their own publications. Kistler said Planning and Zoning pays for their own publications. Parkins agreed and said Secondary Roads pays for the majority of their publications. The budget publications also come out of those lines. Stutsman said she assumes it’s just the Board of Supervisors Office’s because the amounts are not very large. Sullivan said that would make sense.
Rettig said she would like to speak about line 70. She thinks the County should have a grant coordinator, although whether to include it in that line is another question. The County is not taking full advantage of available grants from the State and Federal Government and from corporations. She has been talking to department heads about whether they would apply for grants if they both knew about them and had the time to write them. She thinks appropriate grants are not being applied for across the board. She sees it through her work with the Department of Natural Resources, and the Board sees it with transportation. She is not sure if line 70 was used when the Board budgeted money for a consultant, which was never actually used. Rettig thinks a grant coordinator is more than just a grant writer; it is also the person who does research and communicates about grants with department heads. Rettig said a grant coordinator would assist people with relevant knowledge to write and submit grants. She thinks the County currently has a haphazard way of writing grants, and they should put themselves in a position to obtain their fair share of money by investing in a grant coordinator.
Rettig said she doesn’t know why it’s included in this budget, however. Stutsman said she thinks it’s in this budget for subcontracting. Money has been allocated for it in the past, and no one used it. She said they told departments heads that the money was available for hiring grant writers, but it was never used. As a result, the money was removed.
Rettig said that is not exactly what she is talking about. She does not think the problem involves writing the grants. She thinks it involves finding them, determining whether they will meet a specific need, and negotiating how to get the grant. Rettig said department heads and other employees are sometimes better at writing grants because they know what they are doing. Grant coordination is another matter. Rettig said the City of Coralville has a grant writer, and the position has paid for itself about a million times over through the grants that the person has helped send out. Rettig thinks the County is big enough that someone should be on staff for coordination.
Stutsman said she understands what Rettig is saying and agrees with her on one level. However, on the other level, she doesn’t think the County is quite ready for a grant writer because she doesn’t think they have their act together about where they want the County to go. Although there are a lot of grants available, the question is whether they fit into the mission of what they want to do as a county. She said the downside of grants is that they often go away after a lot of people have been hired. Rettig said that is true, but she has heard Stutsman ask department heads twice in the past three weeks whether they have applied for a grant for something. She knows through a variety of means that there is money available that the County is not applying for because they don’t have the wherewithal to submit the applications.
Neuzil said he thinks the issue falls under the realm of strategic planning. Stutsman agreed. Neuzil said he thinks these are good proposals, but he would like to see a presentation and information in writing. Perhaps that can occur before the end of the budget cycle.
Harney said he agrees with Rettig that available grant money is not being obtained. He said Emergency Management Coordinator Dave Wilson obtains a significant number of grants for a variety of projects and is always monitoring them. Harney agreed that the County is missing out on a lot of money. The County does not necessarily have to spend a lot of money, and he doesn’t think a lot of employees need to be added. It is a matter of having someone to trace the money and put it in place.
Neuzil said he doesn’t think discussion of the issue falls under Department 18, although he knows it’s a line item, and they are able to talk about it. He thinks discussion of potentially adding a new position to County government should occur during strategic planning. Sullivan said it might make sense to talk about it now and discuss contracting the work, similar to the way in which work is contracted to Collective Bargaining Negotiator Judy Perkins. There is a possibility that the wrong person would be hired, and it would not work out. He thinks it would be a good idea to find someone with a proven track record and to offer to pay them to do the work and see how it goes. He wouldn’t mind finding out what a professional can do for them before deciding to hire an employee. Harney said they have discussed doing so in the past, but the downside is that the individual generally wants to receive a specific percentage of the amount received. Stutsman said she wouldn’t have a problem with that.
Neuzil said his point is that he could suggest a large number of things he thinks Johnson County should have, but he doesn’t think the discussion falls under Department 18. Harney agreed. Stutsman said she doesn’t think they are ready to give someone direction regarding what they want. Neuzil said they don’t even know what that is. Neuzil said he thinks Rettig makes a good point about having a discussion about the position, but he thinks they should consider two or three different job descriptions from other communities and weigh the options. He asked if the Board is going to start adding things to the FY11 budget because they have not done so for any departments. Their direction was to maintain current services without adding new services.
Sullivan said a position was added to SEATS for FY10 because SEATS Director Tom Brase made a case that the position would make financial sense. He thinks the same principle would apply if it can be shown that this position makes sense. However, he thinks it would be better to start off with contracted services rather than hiring a new employee. Johnson said he knows that Linn County had a similar position, and that individual became their communications person after the flood of 2008. He said he could obtain a job description. Stutsman asked if the individual was replaced. Johnson said he doesn’t know.
Neuzil said he thinks there is an appropriate time and place to present similar ideas. Sullivan suggested strategic planning. Neuzil said it could be either be part of the strategic plan or the budget; however, the Board has also discussed adding a public information officer and a purchasing person. There are a lot of ideas for additional positions, and he thinks the issues should be discussed more in depth.
Harney said he is not sure that he wants line item 58 to be cut. The Communications Committee is currently involved with a lot of things, and he is not so sure they want to short them financially. Stutsman said to look at the amount of money that has historically been spent by the Communications Committee. Neuzil said he thought the amount was kept somewhat higher because the Board was going to have the Communications Committee look into some areas, such as art. Stutsman said members of the Art Committee said art work needs to be ready to be hung, so there should be any associated costs other than hooks. Harney said he knows they cut back on things done at the Johnson County Fair. Neuzil said there was discussion regarding addition of public signage at the entrances to the County. Stutsman said she thinks the issue involved obtaining the right-of-way more than anything else. She said Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak was working on that. Neuzil said he sees Harney’s point and asked who else is a member of the Communications Committee. Stutsman said she and Harney are members. Neuzil asked if there are other things they think should be done that are not currently being done.
Rettig said the line item involves an increase of $1,000 rather than a reduction. Stutsman agreed. Claiborne said he just made a correction because the formula wasn’t correct. Aschenbrenner agreed. Stutsman asked if he is talking about readjusting it down to $3,100 rather than $4,100. Rettig said what they were given was actually an increase of $1,000. Claiborne disagreed and said it was flat. Aschenbrenner agreed. Neuzil asked who is changing the amount for FY10 and asked if it has been done yet. Stutsman said the Communications Committee did not discuss it on December 4, 2009. Aschenbrenner said the amount is just a reestimate based on the actual from the last three years. Stutsman said she is okay with keeping the amount at $3,100. Sullivan asked if Aschenbrenner is saying that column H is a reestimate, but it is not necessarily part of a budget amendment. Aschenbrenner agreed and said he is just making his best guess as to what the number will be at the end of the year.
Harney said some of his thoughts were that there will be a picnic, and there will be a lot more people involved. Stutsman said it does not involve a specific amount of money and asked how many Board members want to keep the amount at $3,100 and how many want to increase it to $4,100. Neuzil said he would like the amount to remain at $4,100 and not have it re-estimated for FY10. Rettig asked if it would not be spent. Stutsman said she is okay with keeping it at the amount budgeted for FY10. Neuzil said that is what he would like to do. Stutsman said the Communications Committee spends what they know they have. Sullivan said there are always expenditures in May or June for the Johnson County Fair the following fiscal year. That is a perfect opportunity to cut the amount back, if doing so is necessary. Stutsman said Human Resources staff do a good job of planning ahead and have made those purchases in anticipation of the Johnson County Fair. Aschenbrenner said it would result in a proposed 7% decrease over the budget for FY10.
Aschenbrenner said he will move on to discussing revenues if there are no other questions. Sullivan said the Board talks a lot about line items that are not used for significant periods of time. He asked Aschenbrenner for the actual rules in terms of adding and changing lines. Aschenbrenner responded that he generally only inactivates accounts if it is requested by the departments themselves. Sullivan asked if there has to be a specific number of years without entries before they are inactivated. Aschenbrenner said no. Specific expense items are sometimes set up for particular grants, and they are inactivated when the grants end. Stutsman said she thought they used to specify three years of inactivity. Aschenbrenner said he doesn’t think anything automatically happens in GEMs software, and he would have to manually make the changes. Sullivan asked if the auditing firm needs to have a way of knowing that a line item previously existed. Aschenbrenner said not necessarily. He provides the firm with accounts that had activity during a specific year, although there are occasionally zeros across the board. Stutsman said she wonders if there is interest from the Board in determining line items with several years of inactivity to eliminate them. Harney said he thought they were automatically eliminated after three years. Stutsman said she thought so too, but that is evidently not the case.
Sullivan said there are a few lines that bother the Board, such as their own costs for attending the Iowa State Association of Counties (ISAC) and similar meetings. There are approximately four applicable line items, and the overall total is sufficient. The problem with the way it is allocated is that it can show that a Board member overspent money for a particular line item, although the same Board member may have underspent for the other three line items. It can make them look bad, and he wonders if there is a way to better reflect the way the money was spent.
Aschenbrenner said it is difficult to predict the amount of actual expenses that will be incurred a year ahead of time. There are some department heads that take advantage of amendments and want to tweak individual lines by $5 or $10. In his opinion, it is pointless. Aschenbrenner said those departments heads are trying to fit their budgets to their actual expenses at year end, but he doesn’t think that proves they are effective budgeters. It simply shows they are able to look at their reports to try to match them up at the end of the year. It is a difficult situation. Sullivan said he would prefer to see the actual numbers and expects that budgets will be off by a small amount. Aschenbrenner said it is sometimes impossible to predict circumstances and events within a county budget, especially within a budget the size of Johnson County’s.
Aschenbrenner said he can always inactivate and create accounts; however, accounts can never be deleted. Once an account has been created, it remains until accounting systems are changed, and hopefully that will not happen in the near future. Aschenbrenner said some departments have a massive number of accounts, and a point may be reached when they are unable to add new accounts due to exhausting account numbers and possibilities. He said they juggle that problem and want to be consistent.
Harney asked why the accounts remain forever. He thought Slockett told the Board a few years ago that the accounts are automatically eliminated after three years. Aschenbrenner said he is not aware of that, although it was probably true with the old accounting system. Stutsman said the Finance Committee may be able to discuss the issue if it is important enough to warrant restructuring. Sullivan said it is a minor irritation more than anything else. Stutsman questioned the amount of paper used due to printouts including lines with zeros only, although she said the information is no longer being printed. Edwards asked if inactivated lines would drop off the report. Aschenbrenner said he doesn’t think so because they are proprietary Excel files. They would have to be removed manually by Claiborne. If the Board doesn’t want them included on budget worksheets, Claiborne needs to take care of it. Stutsman asked how much time is spent questioning the presence of zeros for various line items and said the issue is discussed year after year.
Aschenbrenner indicated he will move on to discussing revenues. He said he does not believe the franchise tax replacement exists any longer and needs to be zeroed out. If it does exist, it’s not being recorded to this revenue line. The next item is the Homestead and Disabled Veterans’ Credit Replacement. Kistler said he will provide estimates regarding the credits to Claiborne as soon as the Board determines tentative levy rates. He will update the numbers as the Board changes the levy and actually sets it. He cannot come up with an estimate until there is a tentative levy to use for calculations. Aschenbrenner said he thinks the $28,000 re-estimated reduction in that revenue is based on the State’s 10% cut.
Harney asked if he knows why the franchise tax replacement was included. Aschenbrenner said there used to be a revenue stream. However, he thinks something changed legislatively at the State level, and the County no longer receives that revenue. Neuzil asked what the State said to local governments after initially promising a property tax credit. Kistler said the State told the County in June that they will only receive 74% of the amount. As a result, the County cut the amount of the credit to the taxpayers in June to match the amount the State said would be reimbursed. However, prior to the December payment, the State said they were cutting the amount, and it ends up being about 4.5%.
Neuzil asked if the legislators should be asked to be more honest regarding the June assessment. Kistler agreed that the estimate was not accurate. Neuzil said if the State doesn’t believe they can afford the State tax credit, they should say so in June so the County can adjust the payments to the taxpayers. Kistler agreed. Aschenbrenner said the actual expenses show a downward trend over the past three years, and it will probably continue in FY10.
Sullivan asked if it was a pass through expense because he didn’t notice it on the list of expenses. Kistler said no, the adjustments are made in the tax bills so it is not seen as an expense. It is being passed on to the taxpayers. If there is a 26% cut, the tax credit on the tax bill is reduced by 26%. Sullivan said in the past, the County has chosen to fund the Homestead and Disabled Veterans Credit when the State has said they won’t fund. Kistler said Sullivan is correct. The State did not fully fund the Elderly and Disabled and Military Exemption Reimbursement for two or three years, and the Board made up the difference on those. Kistler said that has not occurred for two or three years. The State has fully funded both of those. Sullivan said the Board may want to think about their approach and whether they are prepared to spend $250,000 if they will not be reimbursed by the State.
Aschenbrenner said he believes there was an error made in the revenue stream in the current budget regarding indirect administrative cost reimbursement. The reestimate for this year involves a $750,000 adjustment down for FY10 and FY11. He thinks the number was just entered incorrectly into the FY10 budget when it was passed. Sullivan asked Aschenbrenner to explain the error again. Aschenbrenner said the reimbursement was budgeted at $821,000, and it wasn’t caught until he prepared the budget for FY11. Sullivan said the amount was probably supposed to be about $82,000, and someone hit an extra number. Aschenbrenner agreed that it was probably a key stroke error. Neuzil said that is a big key stroke error. Sullivan agreed. Rettig said they could have gone over their budget as a result. Sullivan agreed. Neuzil said it was money they thought they would receive, but they won’t. Aschenbrenner agreed. Harney said he wonders what the impact will be.
Sullivan asked how that mistake happens and who would catch it. Aschenbrenner said it is on the budget side. Once the budget is done and loaded, he does not go through every line for every departmental budget. Claiborne said he ties out the worksheets. He does the entire budget, and every single number seen was entered by him. Neuzil said they need to ensure there are steps in place to prevent those mistakes from happening.
Aschenbrenner said he receives general interest information from Kriz, and another drop is being seen in general interest revenue. The amount is decreasing from $400,000 in FY10 to about $340,000. Hopefully, that estimate is not too optimistic. Aschenbrenner said the cash reserves are generally dropping so deposits are also dropping and interest rates are currently dismal.
Stutsman said she wants to point out that line item 29 regarding Systems Unlimited should be zeroed out. Sullivan agreed and said the building was already obtained. Aschenbrenner indicated that he thinks it has already been zeroed out. Neuzil agreed. Aschenbrenner said the number just reflects the actual. Stutsman said she is wondering how many more years the item will be listed on the budget. Aschenbrenner asked if she means that she wants the item to disappear from the form. Stutsman said yes. Aschenbrenner said he agrees.
Aschenbrenner said he thinks he calculated the flexible spending deduction amount to reflect the expense side. Generally, when he budgets that, he has the revenue and expenses equal. Based on the reestimate for this year, $170,000 may be slightly low, but hopefully it is revenue and expense neutral. Harney asked if there was a request to increase that amount. Aschenbrenner said he thinks the use of flexible spending has generally increased from year to year.
Aschenbrenner said he thinks the County is receiving slightly more than it is budgeting for the 10% surcharge on fines. That money is collected by the Clerk of Court. He said that completes the information regarding revenue. Sullivan asked if parking revenue will go into Department 18 or into the budget for the Physical Plant, assuming the County is able to start charging for parking. Claiborne said it will go into the budget for the Physical Plant.
Kistler said December 1, 2009 was the due date for cities to file their Tax Increment Financing (TIF) debt, and some of them wait until the very last minute to do so. He pushed hard last week to get the base and increments adjusted so the right proportion of potential TIF revenue was listed for each city, and he gave Claiborne some numbers on December 4, 2009. Several cities had cuts. The City of Iowa City had a tremendous cut to finish the downtown project and several rebates. The City of Solon, the City of Shueyville, and the City of North Liberty also cut their potential revenue. Kistler said at this point, the total countywide regular valuations are up 4.7%. Those affect the General Basic Fund. The Rural Basic Fund valuations are up 3.5%, and the Debt Service Fund valuations are up 4.4%. Kistler said they were fairly solid numbers, but there are currently several large assessment appeals that could result in a drop in value. Neuzil asked for the timing of the appeals. Kistler said the timing depends on the State Appeal Board and whether the cases go to court. The cases may not be settled until FY11, depending on the number of steps in the process. Neuzil asked if the current numbers need to be used in the meantime. Kistler said yes, although some of the appeals may be settled before the budget is complete.
Stutsman asked if a lot of the appeals involve property in Coralville. Kistler said he has not had a chance to speak to County Assessor Bill Greazel, but he knows the City Assessor’s Office is currently involved in four large appeals. Aschenbrenner said a check is immediately written to the property owner after an order is received from a judge or court stating that the individual has won their appeal. Kistler said that is if it is in the current fiscal year. Aschenbrenner said the current year tax revenue is reduced as a result. Once enough money for current tax revenues has been received, some of the amount apportioned out to various governmental entities is taken back to restore the amount refunded to the property owner. Sullivan said the County loses by being the bank in those cases because they can only obtain the money twice a year and have to wait. Aschenbrenner agreed.
Sullivan asked if Kistler can send his spreadsheet regarding TIFs to the Board. Kistler said he will work on updating it right away and send it to the Board. Stutsman asked when the Board meets with legislators. Rettig said December 16, 2009. Stutsman asked Kistler if he can send them the spreadsheet by that time. Kistler said yes. Stutsman said it would be great to hand it to the legislators, even if the Board members do not discuss it with them.
Aschenbrenner indicated that the Elections budget would be presented next. Edwards explained that the spreadsheet includes actual expenses for FY07 and FY09. Stutsman said the information jumps from FY07 to FY09. Aschenbrenner said it is better to look back two years for Elections because the information is more comparable that way. Edwards said two years and four years. He explained the listed columns, and said there are no changes in the amended budget column. Sullivan said the Board actually needs to compare the FY11 budget column to the FY09 budget column to see how they match up.
Edwards said Elections is on a four year cycle, and there is either a Primary or General Election each year. The Non-Presidential General Election will be held in FY11, and it is the only scheduled election during FY11. Sullivan said he is little confused about the part-time, non-benefit wages in the amount of $115,000 for FY09. Edwards said those were for the Presidential Election, which is why the amount is so high. The amount dropped to $50,000 for FY10 and will go back up to $75,000 for FY11. The amount will not be nearly as high as it was for the Presidential Election, but it will be higher than it was for FY10. Part-time, non-benefit employees are utilized to complete a lot of tasks just before and after the elections. Although they are not employed year round, a lot of individuals are employed during those few months. Rettig said it is actually better to compare FY11 to FY07 because it is a similar election cycle. Aschenbrenner and Edwards agreed. Edwards said a four year difference is involved; however, so there will be some inflationary changes. Sullivan said a 10% increase should be seen from inflation alone. In addition, there are 10,000 additional County residents compared to FY07. Parkins said some laws have also changed and result in additional costs. For example, postage must now be paid for ballots coming back, and that was not required in FY07.
Edwards said the current fiscal year included a School Election, City Election, City Primary, and Primary Election. All of those lines will be zeroed out for FY11, and there will be increases for the General Elections lines. The amount for full time wages and benefits is not changing. There is a $25,000 increase in part-time, non-benefit wages. The decrease of $60,000 for part-time, non-benefit wages Primary relates to the poll workers for the Primary Election. Rettig asked if that amount is just for the June Election and does not include the Primary City Council Election. Edwards said that is correct. There is an increase of $104,000 for poll workers for the General Election in FY11. The amount of $17,000 is for part-time, non-benefit wages for satellites for the General Election. Rettig asked why no money was spent for part-time, non-benefit wages General. Edwards said nothing was budgeted for FY10 because the General Election is held every two years. Rettig asked if the amount budgeted for the City Council Election would be listed somewhere else. Edwards agreed. He said there is a decrease of $20,044 for the School Election. The amount of $56,000 listed for the City Council Election will be eliminated for FY11, as will the amount of $26,000 for the City Primary. Harney asked if the County is reimbursed for those amounts. Edwards said yes.
Rettig asked if changing to having the School Election every other year results in a savings of $26,000 or more, although the amount is reimbursed. Edwards said the savings is higher because that amount was only for poll workers. Sullivan said that amount does not include notice and other expenses. Edwards mentioned mileage as another related expense.
Edwards said the line labeled Elections Administration involves items that carry over from year to year and includes supplies and other items that are not allocated to a specific election. Fuels are going down $500 because it seems that costs are not increasing as much as in FY09. There are also fewer elections in FY11 so less equipment will be delivered. Sullivan asked Parkins if she was referring to the postage item line when she said the County is providing prepaid envelopes to absentee voters. Parkins said she does not have a copy of the budget in front of her. Edwards said those costs would be included in that line. Sullivan said the amount has increased significantly over a four year period. Edwards agreed, but said the amount is decreasing significantly compared to FY09 because a Presidential Election was held that year.
Edwards said van maintenance is increasing by $1,000, from $3,000 to $4,000. The budgeted amount for voter registration is decreasing by $1,000, and he thinks that involves voter registration forms and supplies. Ballots and stock supplies are increasing by $400. Edwards said the ballots were previously printed elsewhere, but the Auditor’s Office now has the capability to print them. The cost is for blank ballot stock. The budgeted amount for printing is increasing $2,500, primarily because of the implementation of the Precinct Atlas Program. Laptop computers must be located at each precinct on Election Day, and there are a lot of new forms related to the program. He said the budgeted amount for postage is decreasing $10,000.
Edwards said internet connection fees will also be reduced by $2,000. The Auditor’s Office was paying for the County’s second internet T1 line a couple of years ago, but they are no longer doing so. They are maintaining $3,000 in that account because they will now have the capability to have internet connections between the Auditor’s Office and the polls on election days. Security is one of the purposes for doing so. It will allow for real time updates regarding who has voted and the total number of people who have voted, which will prevent individuals from voting at more than one precinct. It will also allow them to find out how busy each precinct is and whether to send out additional workers and supplies, if necessary. Rettig asked if wireless modems will be used. Edwards said they are not using anything now. However, if it is set up, wired internet connections will probably be used for security reasons. Sullivan said some locations, such as Cedar Township, do not have internet access. Edwards agreed that it may not be possible in some rural locations. However, it should be possible at a lot of school locations.
Edwards said there is a decrease of $8,000 in the amount budgeted for staff registration. It was previously $16,000, and the cost primarily involves certification for the two elections technicians who maintain the voting equipment. Both individuals are currently trained so the budgeted amount is for minimal retraining and to allow for training a new individual if there is staff turnover. Sullivan asked if the two trained individuals are Elections Technician III Bogdana Rus and Elections Technician III James Erickson. Edwards said yes. Harney asked if the $4,000 increase for the van is for the large van parked near the Administration Building. Rettig said the increase is $1,000. Edwards said the amount is for maintenance on three vehicles, two small vans and a large truck. The vans are getting fairly old so more money has been spent on maintenance during the past two years.
Edwards said the accounts for primary elections will be zeroed out for FY11. The accounts for the general elections will be increasing for FY11. The account for stationary forms is $15,000. That includes all of the miscellaneous forms and paper used for the General Election. The official publications line includes elections notices and sample ballots printed in newspapers. The printing line primarily includes ballot printing as well as poll worker manuals and other Election Day forms. Sullivan asked why Edwards anticipates that the costs for official publications and printing will decrease compared to the cost in FY07. Edwards said he thinks something may have been coded wrong in FY07, which may have resulted in an abnormally high number that year. He said the amount for FY09 was only $3,900, which he thinks is closer to the appropriate amount.
Edwards said mileage reimbursement is for staff that visit polling places and drive their own vehicles. Stutsman asked why they are not using County vehicles. Edwards said they do most of the time. Kistler said many people may be out at one time during a busy election, and it is impossible to have enough County vehicles available for everyone in those instances. Stutsman said the line item is increasing significantly. Edwards said he is not sure why it is going up to $500. Stutsman said it is not all that much in the grand scheme of things, but it is increasing from $200 in FY07 to $500 in FY11. Stutsman asked if the increase is in anticipation of higher fuel costs. Edwards said a former Deputy Auditor filled in the amount before leaving employment, so he is not sure why the amount is increasing. He thinks the amount could probably be slightly reduced. Sullivan asked for the difference between that line and the line two down for election officials. Edwards said that line is for mileage for poll workers to drive to and from the polling places on Election Day. Sullivan asked if the previously mentioned line is actually for Auditor’s Office staff. Edwards said yes, including part-time staff. Harney asked if mileage involves travel from the Administration Building to wherever the individual is traveling. Edwards said yes. Aschenbrenner said return mileage is also included. Edwards said the mileage for poll workers includes travel from their home to the polling locations.
Edwards said the amount of $3,500 for telephones in an election is to add additional lines to the Auditor’s Office during elections and to ensure that all of the phone lines, at the polling locations that have them, are active. Rettig asked if there were no phone lines in FY07 since the amount was only $200 that year. She asked if something new was done between FY07 and FY09. Edwards said yes, they began modeming the results from the polls on election night between FY07 and FY09. Previously, poll workers called in the results. Edwards said modeming is a lot faster and more accurate than someone reading a tape over the phone.
Edwards said the cellular phones for General Elections line is to pay poll workers for use of their phones on Election Day at all 57 precincts. The polling place rental line is for small fees paid for the use of several polling places. The truck rental line is for the rental of an additional delivery truck for large elections. The official publications satellite line is for the cost of publishing the notice of satellite voting in the newspaper. The election official mileage satellite is to pay poll workers for travel to and from the satellite locations. The cell phone satellite line is to pay for the use of poll workers’ cellular phones at the satellite sites. Rettig asked if the poll workers are paid a certain amount of money for the day. Edwards said yes, they are paid $10 for the use of their phone to ensure they are available. Otherwise, cellular phones would have to be rented or otherwise made available.
Edwards said the next section is for special elections and involves all zeroes. Although there may be a Special Election next year, it cannot be budgeted for at this point. The next three sections are for school elections, city elections, and city primary elections and are all being zeroed out. Edwards said that brings them to the end of the budgeted expenses.
Edwards said revenues are also decreasing, unfortunately. The County is reimbursed for school and city elections, but there are not any scheduled for FY11, so no revenue will be received. Rettig said she has a question regarding expenses. She asked if an expense reestimation for a budget amendment is expected in the spring to reflect the additional election. Edwards said yes. Rettig asked if he knows the amount. Edwards said not at this time. Edwards said he thinks the compiled cost of the Local Option Sales Tax Election was approximately $80,000. The cost of the recent special election is expected to be similar, although it may be lower due to a lower voter turnout and the time of year. It is hard to predict the amount, however.
Edwards said there are pages for Capital Expenditures and Technology after the Revenues page. He said it involves annual maintenance of iVoter software and all of the voting equipment software. The amount is increasing slightly, but is very similar to FY10 costs. Edwards said the last page includes calculations for budget estimations regarding poll workers for the General Election in FY11. Stutsman asked if it is basically a worksheet. Edwards said yes.
Aschenbrenner said he worked on the Insurance Budget with County Insurance Agent of Record Bob Saunders because he is the expert for the County. Changes in expenditures for FY11 include an anticipated increase of approximately 5% in tort liability coverage, an increase in real property of approximately 8%, and a $10,000 increase in personal property insurance. He said it appears that personal property insurance was also slightly under-budgeted in FY10.
Aschenbrenner said Saunders is estimating a fairly large increase in the area of Worker’s Compensation. Aschenbrenner said the increase is over 10% and closer to 13%. Stutsman asked if the increase is based on what is happening in the industry or if the County is having more claims. Aschenbrenner said he had a conversation with Saunders about it, and he thinks Saunders indicated that the County is in a pool with a lot of other county governments. Aschenbrenner thinks Johnson County’s claims are higher than those of the rest of the pool, on average.
Sullivan asked if the increase has to do with the inspection that the Iowa Municipalities Workers' Compensation Association does at the different shops. Aschenbrenner said he does not know the details involved in the formulation of what the County pays. Sullivan said there was an inspection that was worse than others, and he thinks that might lead to a higher expense. Aschenbrenner said he would guess that it is a variable, if the time and expense is taken to do a study of that kind. He thinks it probably factors into the premium rate. Stutsman said she would like more clarification regarding why the amount has increased so significantly. If it is due to an increase in claims, she thinks the Board needs to determine which department is involved. She said they have been focusing on increases of $200 or $300, and this is a $10,000 increase. Aschenbrenner said he will ask Saunders if he can address it specifically.
Rettig said line 9 says ‘Insured Loss Deductible/Workplace Safety. Somehow the County spent over $500,000 in FY07. Aschenbrenner said it was due to the tornado. It is basically the amount that was not covered by the County’s insurance company. It was more or less their deductible. Rettig said or damage to property. Aschenbrenner agreed. Rettig asked how that relates to workplace safety. Aschenbrenner said the description may not be very accurate. A more appropriate title may be ‘Insured Loss Deductible’ because there is also a line for ‘Workers Compensation/Workplace Safety’.
Aschenbrenner said that line never has any activity, but charges paid out of pocket for damages and losses are flowing through it. A downward trend has been seen, and it seems like the County has been lucky recently in regards to property claims and replacement of destroyed property. He said that is a good sign. It seems like less deer are being hit with County vehicles, although it varies from one year to the next. Aschenbrenner said FY07 was an outlier because of the natural disaster that year. He knows the County’s expenses are increasing because there are more assets to ensure due to new buildings and other projects, and they will continue to trend upwards.
Neuzil said there was a question from Mental Health/Disability Services (MH/DS) Director Kris Artley regarding depreciation of the Health and Human Services (HHS) Building. Neuzil asked if that question would go to Aschenbrenner. Aschenbrenner said that is only for financial statement purposes. Depreciation is a non-cash expense. Neuzil said the information is needed for a State form that Artley must complete, and he told her to communicate about it with either Aschenbrenner or Claiborne. Edwards said the amount will be calculated within the Auditor’s Office at the end of FY10, and the information can be provided to Artley at that time.
Rettig said there has been a 25.99% increase in these areas from FY08 to FY11, and she agrees with Stutsman that the Board should start determining the reason for the increase. She understands that there are more employees and buildings. Although that may fully explain the increase, she indicated that it is important to make that determination because she doesn’t know that the County can handle a 26% increase every three years. Sullivan said it is also important to understand that there are only a certain number of people the County can work with for insurance. Aschenbrenner said he thinks there is also a financial consequence associated with opting out of the insurance pool.
Stutsman said she was asking whether a specific department is involved. Rettig agreed. Aschenbrenner agreed that questions directed toward obtaining an understanding of where the claims are coming from should probably be asked. Sullivan said there was a really bad report for Secondary Roads. Stutsman said that is what the Board needs to address. Sullivan said he thinks the Board needs to know whether that led to the increase. Stutsman agreed. Harney said he thinks it took a $44,000 jump in FY09.
Neuzil asked that the item be added to the Board’s list of possible strategic planning budget issues. Stutsman said she just wants a reason for the increase. Sullivan said Human Resources Coordinator Dana Winkowitsch could probably tell the Board. Aschenbrenner said he does not have any specific information about claims or where they are originating.
Aschenbrenner indicated that he will now discuss revenues. He said he is zeroing out the first line regarding other contributions and reimbursements from other governments, and he is not actually sure where the information was included for FY10. He said they have not seen anything coded to that line in the past three years, but it is $100 regardless. The line for recoveries involves checks received from the insurance company when a claim is made. That is why there was a large amount received in FY07.
Aschenbrenner said he thinks there used to be a different system in place regarding worker’s compensation. He thinks the County paid the employee’s salary while they were out on Worker’s Compensation, and the County would then take the Worker’s Compensation money. He doesn’t think that occurs anymore, however. Aschenbrenner said if an employee is out on Worker’s Compensation now, they receive the Worker’s Compensation payment. Edwards said the County supplements the employee’s wages if the Worker’s Compensation does not meet their normal salary.
Aschenbrenner said insurance premium credits consist of credits received back after the premiums are paid. At the end of the year, there is consideration of actual activity and a decision is made as to whether the County is due to a premium reimbursement, based on their history. He said the County received a sizeable premium credit for Worker’s Compensation for FY09, and that somewhat offsets the rather large increases in premiums. He thinks $40,000 was already received this year. The payments are received once a year, so he doesn’t expect that any more payments will be received this year.
Aschenbrenner said he will contact Saunders to see if he can provide a more thorough explanation regarding the increase in worker’s compensation amounts. As Aschenbrenner recalls, Saunders told him it had something to do with the County’s history in comparison to those of the other pool participants.
Aschenbrenner said he understands Institutional Accounts to consist of bills presented from State facilities and other facilities after individuals are placed in an institutional setting either by the court or voluntarily. A lot of the lines relate to youth, chemical dependency, or mental health related commitments or dual diagnoses, which involve a combination of factors. He said any adjustments made to these lines were based on actual expenses and trends. It is a very difficult department to budget for because it can vary dramatically.
Sullivan asked if most of these lines are related to the Debt Services Levy rather than the General Basic Fund. Claiborne and Aschenbrenner said no, they flow through the General Basic Fund. Sullivan asked if the General Supplemental Levy can be used for these lines. Claiborne said the General Supplemental Levy involves MECCA. Neuzil said there was discussion a few years ago about transferring General Fund Transfers into the General Supplemental Fund if they were eligible for the General Supplemental Fund. He is not sure if all of these lines have been reviewed to see if there is any essential purpose that falls out of them. Aschenbrenner said he doesn’t know and doesn’t want to speculate.
Neuzil said he has a hunch that they could be considered either by the Finance Committee or during strategic planning, as the Board looks at different projects to work on. Sullivan said Aschenbrenner stated that it is very difficult to budget for these lines, other than using information from previous years. Sullivan said he has a hunch that the General Supplemental Fund could be used for some of them, as a result. Aschenbrenner said possibly. Rettig said youth are included in the lines and asked if mental health committals are also included. Edwards said they involve all substance abuse commitments and the substance abuse half of dual commitments between mental health and substance abuse. The mental health side goes through MH/DS. Rettig asked if the lines involve only the substance abuse aspect. Edwards said yes, other than the very first line.
Aschenbrenner said his philosophy involving this department is that they want to budget for it effectively, but they do not want to be stuck in case the budget increases dramatically, as it has in some previous years. Although those years may not be reflected on the spreadsheet, he remembers years when he first began employment that the budget increased dramatically. That can result from the effect of one person. Although he pared the budget down to some degree, he doesn’t want to go much lower because he doesn’t like surprises from an accounting perspective, and he is sure the Board doesn’t want surprises from a budgeting perspective. He doesn’t want the taxpayers to have to pay when there may or may not be expenditures running through there, but he has to be careful. He has tried to be realistic about changes made. He thinks he may be being too aggressive because there hasn’t been any activity in the line during the past two years, but the last year of actual expenses was $21,000. He thinks the amount may be okay.
Stutsman said she hopes the reduction is a reflection of some of the programming that is being done. Harney said he thinks she’s right because he thought it would be higher due to some of the private costs. Aschenbrenner said it seems there was a directive from the State late in FY09 indicating that a lot of expenses would be flowing toward Johnson County due to a particular case or person. However, they have no idea what the County has budgeted, and Aschenbrenner has not seen those expenses or he would have reflected them in the reestimate. He thinks only one line was increased in the reestimate for FY10, and he thinks it was for attorney’s fees.
Harney asked if MH/DS incurred some of those costs due to the closing of some facilities and moving people a couple of years ago. Stutsman said she doesn’t think so. Aschenbrenner said it seems like there was a run of over $100,000 during one particular year about five years ago, but they haven’t seen that since.
Stutsman asked if there have been issues involving billing from the institutions, in which the institutions hang on to bills for significant periods of time. Aschenbrenner said he knows that is an issue on the MH/DS side. The Auditor’s Office has to constantly go through their bills to look for accruals that relate back to years prior. He finds it astounding that the State says the County’s reporting is terrible, but it is a function of the fact that the State is not billing in a timely fashion. Neuzil asked if there are revenues for that department. Aschenbrenner said he has never seen revenues come through that department.
Neuzil asked Aschenbrenner to address the 2% reduction question. Aschenbrenner said he tried to build in more than a 2% reduction into all of the budgets he prepared. He tried to whittle away any flush in the budgets as much as possible. Edwards said they did not have quite a 2% reduction in Department 03. If a 2% cut is required, it would have to be taken out of part-time, non-benefit wages. Most of that budget consists of full-time wages. Because the non-personnel is a very small component, the part-time, non-benefit wages are really the only place that could be cut from. Sullivan asked if that is primarily talking about minute-taking and part-time elections staff. Edwards said Minutes and Real Estate come out of Department 03. Sullivan said the 2% cut question was not addressed for Elections. Edwards agreed and said the overall budget is already decreasing over 2%. Aschenbrenner said he will follow up on the questions he received.
Neuzil asked Claiborne for discussion regarding the FY11 budget. Claiborne said he needs to update the tally sheet from the last meeting because he has not had a chance to do so. The only thing he added was the ELMO projector, which the Board is going to consider later. Neuzil said if the question regarding block grants, specifically regarding the Coralville Center for the Performing Arts, has been followed up on yet. Neuzil indicated that someone answered no. He said the questions include whether it was paid off and what year it began.
Stutsman asked when the next budget meeting is scheduled. Sullivan said December 14, 2009. Neuzil said budget meetings are also scheduled for December 16, 2009 and December 30, 2009. Sullivan said the December 16, 2009 meeting is labeled as open discussion, and he asked if that is when the Board wants to further discuss the items on the tally sheet. Claiborne said he doesn’t think the Board will be in a position to do so at that time. They heard from Kistler that evaluations are close, but Claiborne would prefer that the Board make the major decisions at the very end like they have done in the past. They will then know exactly what money the County has. Claiborne said that is the reason there are several meeting dates scheduled for January. Sullivan said the Budget Meeting scheduled for December 16, 2009 may not be needed then. Claiborne agreed.
Neuzil said some strategic questions have been raised, and asked if discussion regarding those items needs to happen during the Strategic Planning Meeting, which is also scheduled for December 16, 2009. Johnson said he thought they could choose one meeting or the other. Rettig said they should choose the meeting time of 9:00 a.m. since guests are arriving at 8:00 a.m. Neuzil said that makes sense and to keep both meetings scheduled for the time being, although the meeting at 9:00 a.m. may be restructured to include strategic discussion regarding the budget and additional ideas or program.
Neuzil asked which departments have not yet presented their proposed budgets. Stutsman asked if MH/DS is one of those departments. Neuzil said the presentations will pretty much be done after December 14, 2009. Johnson said the budgets for Information Technology (IT) and the Board of Supervisor’s Office still need to be presented. Rettig said Human Resources too.
Neuzil said it would be helpful to have information fairly soon regarding the projected time for presenting the budget to the community and said it would be great if the Board could have the information by December 14, 2009. The Board can then start setting aside dates. Neuzil and Sullivan indicated that budget meetings will not be scheduled for January 18, 2010 due to the holiday or for January 20, 2010 due to an ISAC Meeting. Neuzil said it would be helpful to have February and March dates. Stutsman agreed.
Adjourned at 11:27 a.m.
By Meaghan Mercer, Recording Secretary