APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Mr. Wilson moved, seconded by Ms. Leifheit to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously by a voice vote.

 

Mr. Bockman told the committee this item was just an informational note. The committee’s intention to sell bonds was announced at the August meeting. The document detailing what the bonds sold at and a resolution to adopt will be presented on the night of the County Board meeting, September 18, 2002. Mr. Bockman also made a follow-up to a question raised at the August meeting by Mr. Pritchard about nature of a current refunding. He stated that, "If the term of refunding is no longer than the original term of the bonds and money is saved in each of the years that the bonds are refunded, than there is no provision for a back-door referenda or any referenda."

PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED FY 2003 BUDGET

Mr. Gary Hanson, Deputy County Administrator distributed to the committee the FY 2003 Budget Recommendation dated September 4, 2002 by the County Administrators and a Scribble Sheet with highlights (a copy of which will be placed on file along with a copy of these minutes). The Budget Workbooks were available for review for all County Board Members present. Mr. Hanson gave an informative overview of the Workbook starting with the Recommendations & Appeals and the Departmental Requests by Committee. Chairman Steimel asked when the appeals sheets needed to be returned. Mr. Hanson stated, Thursday, September 19, 2002 after the September Board Meeting.

The Property Tax Caps is the first big item to effect the budget. This is the 3^rd year under the tax cap and is starting to show some impact. Next year the COLA amount is 1.6% and new construction is estimated at 2.6%. There are no referendums authorizing an increase to any of the levying authority which brings a total of 4.2% tax levy to increase in the new year. This is a 1.5% increase to the average taxpayer. He gave the example that a taxpayer who owns a home with a market value of $150,000 and with normal growth on that value it will bring the house up to about $155,000. Then the tax would be between the increased assessed value and the tax increase which the County is asking will be about $6.68 for that homeowner’s $150,000 home, or 1 ˝ % above this current year. Mr. Hanson reported that the budget year presented was a balanced budget of about $45,000,000 and is up about 3% over last year.

Challenges to balance the budget reported by Mr. Hanson were significant. At the start, the County was $550,000 out-of-balance not including any position requests. One of the biggest factors is Health Insurance. Reports show a deficit of almost $600,000 in the Medical Insurance Fund. Premiums are likely to increase significantly coupled with changes in the plan with deductibles and co-insurance. Chairman Steimel asked how they were going to address the insurance challenge. Mr. Bockman explained that there are two fronts that will be attacked. One is a change in the basic plan design. Deductibles, co-pays, and out-of-pocket maximums will all go up in an attempt to transfer some of the cost to those who use the plan the most. The second front is a premium increase of approximately 45% coupled with a decrease in the plan design. He stated the County has received one indemnity plan and is looking for others. Mr. Bockman stated that it will be addressed later in the year with more details. Ms. Tobias asked if the numbers could go down. Mr. Bockman said absolutely. He said that they were within 30-45 days of getting firmer numbers and will report them back to the committee when they have them. Ms. Dubin asked if he could see or foresee an impact to the county losing employees due to a loss in benefits. Mr. Bockman said it was a serious fear to lose valued employees who the county can least afford to lose.

Mr. Hanson continued to describe the challenges and includes a very big loss, $200,000 less in revenue in the general fund alone, in investment income for next year. Also, he noted that the cash balances are down. He recommended that the county drop the merit program for next year because of the cost.

GASB 34 is a financial reporting standard that will change how departmental budgets are put together. In 2003 and future years, the budget will reflect amounts for all employee benefits that are attributable to a department. This will give a more accurate measurement or what it costs to run a department. Those amounts will be in the final document approved in November.

He announced that the budget is also available for review on the County’s website www.dekalbcounty.org. Chairman Steimel asked Mr. Hanson to describe appeals process. Mr. Hanson stated the recommended budget is presented. Concerns can be raised through appeals by September 19, 2002. Appeals can be made by a County Board Member or Department Heads. It first goes to the standing committee that oversees that department. If that committee concurs with the appeal it would come to the Administrative Services Committee. If it is not concurred with it will die at that point. It comes back to the Administrative Services Committee October 2, 2002 which is also the night of the public hearing on the budget. Chairman Steimel asked if there were any questions from other board members or the audience. There were none.