[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6527469,"mediaKeyId","3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb","parentId",3591218,"title","Commissioners press staff on overtime and utility spending amid budget adjustments","audioSeconds",555,"startMs",13862000,"endMs",14417000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb&start=13862&end=14417","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb/thumbnail_13862000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6527469/Forsyth-County/North-Carolina/Commissioners-press-staff-on-overtime-and-utility-spending-amid-budget-adjustments","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6527469-f987c1a51032de33943f222d530f5938/orig.mp4?Expires=1775204786&Signature=jShMVtPAExvvSrmmDwNN97iBNSUxP7Bmg17AWeD-q4iDteUNnmYy3I6HOZ-giRMQ2lyF7v5~wGoHjgJno4FciZRufgvt~GaK~PY5TB-mL04KVpsUH-fDcQpj65a4QThUkiXd8lcNz8Tt18BstJ5fOE4QkJWrWMMkdoGjIOrCqgZmNecjjUtfZICF3ldt9wKLrScq4OhNKPs336muHwAh19HsMXezqXKiin7xg70d0F3AxnxjIScZ1P2j9g17Tyj~5d69l8UNNLkBOKVss3J2CDMW~NZt-BS-JthxqhQagWqAR7TWCHqr3KAPkblgXq33sUQKYBJVK~5vMYFj8HC5kA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Forsyth County","date","2025-05-29T17:54:11Z","article","Commissioners reviewed department overtime projections and utility estimates as part of the broader budget discussion and asked staff for tighter monthly monitoring.

Why it matters: projected overtime and utility spend affect the county’s personnel and operations budget and therefore the county’s fund‑balance outlook.

Staff presented an overtime analysis that contrasted amended FY2025 overtime budget figures with anticipated actuals and the recommended FY2026 budget. The FY2025 amended overtime budget was shown at approximately $2.0 million; staff’s anticipated actuals for June 30 were substantially higher (discussed as roughly $7.8 million in the meeting materials). For FY2026 the recommended overtime budget was reduced relative to the FY2025 expected actuals, with staff explaining they “right sized” overtime budgets to more realistic levels and planned to rely on improved vacancy management to reduce overtime pressure. Staff said some departments historically underbudgeted overtime and have consistently run over their overtime lines.

Commissioners asked whether vacancy savings were sufficient to offset overtime and how smaller departments and high‑overtime departments such as Emergency Services and the Sheriff’s Office will manage reductions. Staff said Emergency Services and the Sheriff’s Office have increased staffing levels and that improved vacancy rates should help reduce overtime demand; they also committed to closer monthly monitoring of overtime during the year. County staff acknowledged that the Sheriff’s Office has historically large overtime expenditures and that controlling overtime will be a continuing challenge.

On utilities, staff corrected a transposition error noted in the meeting: a public‑health electricity figure and a water/sewer figure had been transposed in an earlier worksheet; the corrected figures brought utility estimates more in line with expectations.

Directives from commissioners included more granular monthly reporting on overtime and utility spending to track trends and identify where vacancies, scheduling or policy changes could reduce overtime.

Ending: staff will supply more frequent overtime and utility reports for commissioners and will monitor high‑overtime departments closely as the budget year begins.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Commissioners Special Meeting - May 29 2025","oneSentenceSummary","During budget review commissioners examined high projected overtime and questioned utility line items. Staff said overtime is historically underbudgeted, vacancy management should reduce overtime, and a transposed utility estimate was corrected.","taxTitle","Forsyth County, North Carolina","taxId",5013,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6527474,"Board of Forsyth County commissioners decline planned salary increase, cites symbolic cost‑cutting",357,13511000,13868000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb&start=13511&end=13868","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb/thumbnail_13511000.jpg","/articles/6527474/Forsyth-County/North-Carolina/Board-of-Forsyth-County-commissioners-decline-planned-salary-increase-cites-symbolic-costcutting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6527474-8b4e193ca55de48041e4d5c378dc0e01/orig.mp4?Expires=1775204786&Signature=P0nMM146wbvT-PABPxBQboIq2L0PePHZqV-O6nbtYpMDiTT3hdUWvTr5fsQMAxzt3F7399HX~Bxs-bXs2pT9tblOM-5K1TkDWtGSlNhm1~JpQcFx4QbXbO1oLSgCuonqxJGuZP1Z~s0eQHdpBigU6RKjjdSWJzQoU4KJasupY1Qx-RhyZllrcOS1X2WVnpOcCR7fNy5c5BBKogSJFeSu-RKHtdouFXPbLuczP14NrKnzPn2TAGWzFrYoBUNu7BoLX-z3CktFyE6mOwgNGBFI6eOo7IiQhXyfBaBeiQ9eCQbY9zifRgZlLRewK50yZQuLt5U3rfavZn~~Rni0mb-hFg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Forsyth County commissioners voted to decline a recommended merit increase for elected commissioners as a symbolic budgetary savings measure during the budget discussion.

Why it matters: the board framed the action as a symbolic contribution to cost containment amid broader budget pressures, including the county’s fund‑balance concerns and the school district’s financial shortfall.

Commissioner Bessie moved that the board decline the salary increase for commissioners for the current budget year; Commissioner McDaniel seconded the motion. County staff later provided an estimate of the direct savings: about $9,010 in salary savings and roughly $700 in associated fringe costs, for a combined estimate of about $9,700. The motion applied to the Board of Commissioners’ compensation only; staff noted any parallel impact on school‑board stipends would be handled according to the formula in the budget ordinance if the board later chose to act separately.

The motion passed on a voice vote; one commissioner opposed. Several commissioners described the action as symbolic and modest compared with larger budget items but said it was appropriate to begin with reductions within the board where feasible.

Ending: staff will reflect the decision in budget documents; commissioners said other budgetary tradeoffs will be considered as the budget process continues.

","Commissioners voted to decline the recommended merit increase for their own salaries for the year; staff estimated the move saves roughly $9,700 in salary and fringe costs.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6527479,"Forsyth County approves revised community grants list, funds capped and tied to 0.28¢ tax increase",8406,4775000,13181000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb&start=4775&end=13181","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb/thumbnail_4775000.jpg","/articles/6527479/Forsyth-County/North-Carolina/Forsyth-County-approves-revised-community-grants-list-funds-capped-and-tied-to-028-tax-increase","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6527479-f129030de3957bdf081fbf2e7bf39b21/orig.mp4?Expires=1775204786&Signature=mkxE2jcCNOdvB53JDP4IjC3mgw2HZol3Es4Z1w0h2ghgv8IIISCcmY-4ExmQaaxJkhfFYG-s93RrSWgp4PUcBTKAp3sjqW2u2R5Q~byk88KYDh-MRk81wJ3UotKePWpTgTb9TNn9DUZl-yM8nob5wU2xrrfkC0dyD2zz~EDT7x9aVoHz050V5J32Ph5tnf4l4UArvjSHGFxOsFhACImLjTjmENX9BbsLDpsAAxu~aLWeT~4o1kHMCXYT~Jw4H7TAkCKJ0j2i83up7Q2CskVDR0PTbWJ8YyI4vIY0krH98IZ8kCoexJUFXxLf7gnawD56SXndujO8~suA-7HYqahEdg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Forsyth County commissioners voted to restore a portion of community grants that had been omitted from the county manager’s recommended budget, approving a revised grants list and authorizing a funding cap while reserving the board’s final allocation decisions for the budget adoption process.

Why it matters: the grants fund a range of social, senior, veterans, health and cultural services across Forsyth County; the board tied the restored funding to a 0.28¢ tax‑rate increase and set a cap on total community grants while emphasizing the funding is not guaranteed in future years.

The sequence of board actions began when Chairman Martin proposed restoring the full community‑grants amount that staff and the grants review committee had recommended. The board amended and authorized a cap of up to $1,849,200 for community grants (motion amended to explicitly authorize “up to $1,849,200”) and the motion passed on an initial vote 5 to 2. Commissioners emphasized that the cap was not an automatic guarantee for each grantee and reiterated language in the county’s budget ordinance that prior funding does not create an entitlement.

Following a recess and staff review, the board considered a revised grants list that removed several items and made small additions; county staff said the revised package represented “everything the Grama Committee recommended with a few exceptions” and described item‑level changes. The board approved the revised grants list totaling $1,591,008.12 by roll‑call (motion carried 4 to 3). The county manager was directed to include expenditures for that amount in the recommended budget, and commissioners preserved their right to make final selections during the formal budget vote.

Commissioners and staff discussed process and oversight. Staff noted they had sent updated communications to applicants in April clarifying that staff recommendations were not final and that the board would make the final decisions during the budget process. A county attorney or counselor reminded commissioners of the statute referenced in the meeting that restricts commissioners from discussing or voting on grant funding for nonprofits on whose board they serve; the staff suggested handling potential conflicts by first adopting a list of nonprofits with no conflicts and then considering amendments for conflicted items with the conflicted commissioner recused.

The board separately considered adding Colladium (a local science museum) to the list with a $225,000 appropriation to continue Title I school field‑trip programming and free admissions for low‑income visitors. Commissioner McDaniel moved to add the Colladium at $225,000; the motion was seconded but failed on a tie vote (recusal noted by the maker of the motion). The Colladium request had been in the community grant committee’s recommendations but was not included in the county manager’s original recommended budget.

Commissioners who opposed restoring the full prior grant level cited current county fiscal pressure, the unresolved school district shortfall and concerns about adding to the tax rate; commissioners who voted to restore funds emphasized immediate human impacts such as Meals on Wheels for seniors, veterans’ services and other programs that community organizations provide.

Ending: the board adopted a capped, revised grants package and directed staff to include the expenditures in the recommended budget; individual grant awards and any conflicted items will be finalized during the budget adoption process and may require recusals where commissioners have conflicts.

","After debate, the county approved a reduced list of community grants totaling $1,591,008.12 and authorized up to $1,849,200 as a cap; the board tied the appropriation to a 0.28¢ tax‑rate increase to cover the amounts, and later rejected a separate $225,000 Colladium add‑on in a tie vote.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6527483,"Forsyth County commissioners debate response after Winston‑Salem Forsyth County Schools request $32 million one‑time loan",3686,1110000,4796000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb&start=1110&end=4796","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3591218-d53e2da7b4b190caa4ad436cb9b103bb/thumbnail_1110000.jpg","/articles/6527483/Forsyth-County/North-Carolina/Forsyth-County-commissioners-debate-response-after-WinstonSalem-Forsyth-County-Schools-request-32-million-onetime-loan","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6527483-9de7d3f954ed520e74aef04a6d75b642/orig.mp4?Expires=1775204786&Signature=d4On9fUxgRWh2JgPWNiJlz2ACSvOdNi9btlad-ZfDrmyCsOKHGFAJQWkB1ZMjtVoPJwyr-9W6lGwGQVf~ZdxaKsnQBofIThAvZQK1-uB8mAYQ-Hlox5tq-vi7jbZV2vqM7pL3l~TxHbmJPKS89aX2c-4lBTLVzuj2jYjxQ4ys2pHg~zLchLnjqMwal6AjUhUQX9Lxo-zZT7BU65AjZ1p9IEVRueYrV~gDQRSDT2-KQNN4mpxesf~P6J~qUN48ofBdJyBLi1TBMhnc9yzWds--xfTpeHiKa5lpXagtl1thOTfP05t3FZyUb6WH9BSAxpr6DkQIPN5Jc44vBzdhXXLcA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Chairman Martin convened a special Forsyth County Board of Commissioners budget meeting to review a letter received from Winston‑Salem Forsyth County Schools that describes a multi‑million dollar cash shortfall and asks the county for a one‑time loan. The school district proposed a $32 million one‑time loan after identifying roughly $10 million the district could make available from its child nutrition enterprise fund, and reported an outstanding local vendor debt and state overdrafts that contribute to its deficit.

Why it matters: the district’s cash issues could affect payroll, vendor payments and classroom staffing in the current fiscal year and prompted county officials to consider options that protect the county’s fund balance while helping the school system maintain operations.

Commissioners and staff summarized the district’s letter and the district’s own financial review. According to the materials discussed, the district’s child nutrition fund has a fund balance of about $12,000,000 that provides a cash bridge while federal reimbursements arrive; the district estimates it could use about $10,000,000 of that balance to offset a stated $42,000,000 problem down to $32,000,000, which it characterized as the basis for its one‑time loan request to the county. The district also reported roughly $18,000,000 in overdrafts owed to the state and approximately $24,000,000 in local overspending that had created vendor obligations; of that local amount, the district estimated it owes the county about $5,000,000 for services including school resource officers, matching nurse positions, gasoline purchases at county pumps and a nominal maintenance‑garage lease.

County staff said the county has provided its monthly allocations for the fiscal year and advanced funds for May and June payroll to ensure educators were paid. Staff warned the district had used restricted and nongeneral funds in ways that require accounting corrections; a county finance official said the district’s consultant audit work is still in progress and the amounts may change as the district completes its audit.

Commissioners discussed options rather than taking immediate formal action. Proposals and comments included: stronger monthly monitoring and reporting from the school district tying funding sources to eligible expenses; not using county fund balance as a first option because of bond‑rating and financial‑stability concerns; and potential limited tax‑rate options in 2026 (examples cited during the meeting: a quarter cent increase would cost about $7.50 a year on a $300,000 house; a penny and a half would cost about $45 a year on the same house). Several commissioners cautioned that school board decisions about cuts had not been approved and that the state’s role is central because the district also reported amounts owed to the state.

Commissioners pressed for documents: multiple commissioners requested line‑by‑line budgets, contracts, vendor invoices and other records from the district and encouraged county staff and the district to share any monthly financial report the district adopts. Vice Chair Wisenhunt and County Manager Chantelle Robinson said they planned to meet with representatives of the State Board of Education when state officials visit Winston‑Salem later that week.

No formal county appropriation, loan approval or repayment agreement was made at the meeting. Commissioners did not vote on the district’s loan request; instead they discussed monitoring, next steps and timing. The board decided to cancel a scheduled follow‑up budget session for the following Monday because no new school information was expected before that date.

Looking ahead: county officials said they will continue information‑gathering and will seek greater financial transparency from the district; the state’s involvement will factor into possible solutions. Commissioners repeatedly emphasized protecting the county’s fund balance and noted that any tax decisions for 2026 would be made separately under the county’s budget process.

Ending: county staff will continue to coordinate with the district and state officials; commissioners asked for monthly financial reports and supporting documentation from the district before considering fiscal assistance.

","County commissioners discussed a letter from Winston‑Salem Forsyth County Schools outlining a multi‑million dollar shortfall, potential repayment paths and program cuts; no county loan or appropriation was approved, but commissioners directed increased financial oversight and discussed possible limited tax options.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commissioners press staff on overtime and utility spending amid budget adjustments

Board of Forsyth County commissioners decline planned salary increase, cites symbolic cost‑cutting

Forsyth County approves revised community grants list, funds capped and tied to 0.28¢ tax increase

Forsyth County commissioners debate response after Winston‑Salem Forsyth County Schools request $32 million one‑time loan