Northumberland supervisors consider 1.25% pay increase as reserve fund would drop about $429,004

Northumberland County supervisors debated whether to adopt a 1.25% across-the-board pay increase for county employees and how to cover the local share of state-funded raises during their June meeting.

County Administrator Mr. Tedlock told the board the discussion from the prior day produced additional numbers related to a 1.25% increase and that the county’s share for Social Services would be about $1,734 in local dollars. "The board from yesterday's discussion, asked to get some additional numbers related to a 1.25% increase," Mr. Tedlock said.

The nut graph: supervisors pressed staff for the budget mechanics and tradeoffs — whether to use reserve funds, raise taxes or cut department budgets. Mr. Tedlock and other supervisors repeatedly warned that dipping into the undesignated fund balance would reduce the county’s financial cushion. Staff estimated that covering the school, county and social services increases without cuts would draw about $429,003.90 from the undesignated fund balance.

Administrators gave more detail on Social Services funding. Ms. Clayton, speaking for the agency, described state and local splits for different raise scenarios and said the state had given one agency allocation of $29,830 for a 3% raise but that the county would need to provide a local match. "The state gave the agency $29,830. That was for a 3% raise, but the county would have to pay $4,624 of that," Ms. Clayton said, adding that for the 1.25% scenario she would need $1,734 in local funds and that without state funds the total local need for that agency would be $12,009.30.

Supervisors expressed competing priorities. Several members said they wanted employees to receive raises but worried about the county’s dwindling contingency. Supervisor Williams and others said they would not vote to further deplete contingency funds. "I will not be able to vote in favor of anything that further depletes our contingency fund," Supervisor Williams said. Supervisor Long urged finding revenue, including invoking earlier local options, while other supervisors warned a tax increase or tapping reserves could be unpopular or risky if an emergency arises.

Staff presented a budget framework described as a proposed budget order with no county-side raises included; Mr. Tedlock said that the 0% county-side scenario produced a modest positive projection (staff estimated a $203,002.81 positive in the 0% county-side model). The board instructed staff to prepare the necessary resolutions and documents for adoption and to return with finalized numbers; the board scheduled a follow-up meeting to finalize the budget on Wednesday the 20th at 5 p.m.

Supervisors asked for monitoring and reporting requirements if supplemental appropriations are approved. The board requested monthly financial reports from the school division and quarterly reconciled reports before the next draw so supervisors could track spending and avoid midyear surprises. Mr. Tedlock confirmed he would prepare the revenue anticipation documentation used in prior years if needed and that staff were watching potential borrowing needs.

Ending: The discussion closed with no formal vote on county-wide raises. The board directed staff to prepare resolutions and paperwork for the board’s next meeting on the budget and to provide regular expenditure reports; formal decisions about raises, reserve use or tax changes were left for the scheduled follow-up.