Road-and-bridge levy falls below 10'cent threshold; general fund transfers required to maintain 10'cent rate
Loading...
Summary
Staff presented road-and-bridge tax calculations showing the no-new-revenue and voter-approved scenarios and explained that transfers from the general fund will be required to hold the road tax at the statutory 10'cent level; commissioners reviewed precinct allocations and net increases.
Budget staff told commissioners the road-and-bridge property-tax levy under the no-new-revenue calculation would decline below the statutory 10-cent target and that general-fund transfers will be required to restore the levy to 10 cents per $100 valuation. Staff displayed worksheets showing a small net increase in road revenues under the voter-approved scenario but explained how the shift in assessed values means the county must transfer funds to make the levy whole.
Why it matters: the county sets the road-and-bridge levy at 10 cents but changing assessed values and the formula for the no-new-revenue rate can push the apparent levy below that target. To maintain the 10-cent commitment, staff said they would transfer money from the general fund into the road-and-bridge accounts.
Details in the draft: staff reported no-new-revenue road levy calculations at roughly $5.2 million in collections (after including frozen taxes and delinquency allowance), and the voter-approved projection added roughly another $94,000 in available road revenue. Staff showed the line-item transfers needed to maintain the 10-cent levy and the distribution of the net increase across precincts using the same allocation percentages as the prior year. The presenter listed the estimated net increases by precinct (examples cited in the worksheet: Precinct 1 roughly $177,000, Precinct 2 roughly $180,000, Precinct 3 roughly $210,000, Precinct 4 roughly $181,000), resulting in an aggregate net increase of about $817,000 to road-and-bridge budgets.
Commissioner questions focused on contingency budgets and on whether past contingency or equipment appropriations affected the apparent decreases in some precincts. Staff noted some prior-year contingency amounts and one-time equipment lines explained the changes: for example, Precinct 2’s apparent decrease reflected that last year the precinct carried a roughly $570,000 contingency item that was not budgeted this year.
Next steps: staff will include the required general-fund transfers in the next draft to show cost-neutral ways to preserve the 10-cent road levy and will annotate which precinct lines contain one-time items or contingency.
