Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews third-quarter solid waste budget; asks finance staff for clearer forecasts
Summary
At the April 23 meeting staff reported the solid waste fund was roughly 59% spent with 75% of the year elapsed; board members requested more detailed forecasting, asked finance staff to attend the next meeting and to explore software report changes.
Staff presented a third-quarter review of the Park County solid waste budget and said the fund was about 59% expended with roughly 75% of the fiscal year elapsed. The presentation noted several line items expected to be over or under budget by year-end and flagged personnel costs and office-supplies spending as areas requiring further detail.
Matt Whitman (staff) gave the executive summary and said the budget was generally “on track” for the end of the year but called out personnel costs that had been calculated incorrectly for the budget year; finance made an adjustment for next year and personnel costs were expected to be over budget for the current year. The board asked for more granular forecasting that projects act-complete amounts and identifies trends monthly or quarterly rather than waiting until year-end.
Members discussed specific categories: a new printer purchase contributed to an office-supplies overrun (amount not specified in the meeting), maintenance and repair costs for aging front-load trucks had increased, and staff planned to sell an older front-load truck to offset repair costs. The board also discussed the county’s 54xx accounts related to landfill remediation (DEQ-required trust/reserve) and clarified those remediation costs are tracked separately from day-to-day solid waste operations.
Board members asked that Erica (finance staff) or another finance representative attend the next meeting to demonstrate what reporting the software can generate and whether the county’s accounting system can produce an act-complete forecast, percentage-change indicators, and a more detailed month-to-month or quarter-to-quarter variance report. The board directed staff to return with options and examples at the next meeting.
