Northampton County Council approves midyear budget amendments after hours of debate over audit adjustments and prior transfers

Northampton County Council voted June 18 to adopt two midyear amendments to the county’s 2025 budget after extended public and council debate about audit adjustments, a prior multi‑million dollar transfer and the county’s fiscal reporting.

The June 5 amendment, described by county finance staff as mostly pass‑through grant revenue for human services and 9‑1‑1, passed on a roll call vote of 8 in favor and 1 opposed. Council later voted 8–1 to untable and adopt the May 15 amendment, which includes additional human services adjustments and an audit adjustment the administration had held separate.

The debate centered on a transfer described in council discussion as roughly $8.5 million that was moved into a county fund used by a long‑term care facility and whether that transfer had been properly approved or disclosed to council. Councilmember John Brown said the transfer and other unaudited entries left the council without confidence in the starting point for the 2025 budget: “We don’t know what those 24 20 24 financials actually are,” Brown said, adding that the unaudited statements showed only $3,432 in unassigned monies.

Steve Baron, Northampton County director of finance, told the council the April unaudited statements are a snapshot and that the external auditors’ work will produce the final general purpose financial statements. Baron said the administration expects an unqualified audit opinion and that an outstanding audit adjustment left the county’s opening 2025 balance “$1,400,000 too high,” a number the administration wants to reconcile before finalizing the statements. He also described most line items in the June 5 amendment as pass‑through federal or state grant revenue rather than ongoing county tax revenue.

Councilmembers pressed for more detail on which items were reimbursable grants and which would create ongoing obligations. Baron told the council the Department of Justice grant supporting a proposed social work position is a reimbursement grant and described it as a three‑year award the county expects to renew annually through reimbursement procedures. “We have to spend it before we get it from the Department of Justice,” Baron said.

Several council members, including Brown and Ron Heckman, said they support the county’s service programs but remain concerned about transparency and the timing of fiscal information. Councilmember Warren and others said delaying approval would harm human services programs that rely on the grants. Warren noted that the county must be able to accept and spend funds that arrive at variable times and that holding the amendments would delay those services.

The council’s finance committee and general discussion repeatedly returned to the same questions: who authorized the $8.5 million transfer into the facility fund in 2024; whether the administration provided enough detail in advance to allow council review; and whether audit adjustments should be resolved before additional amendments are approved. County finance staff said the $8.5 million reflected multiple smaller accounting entries and reclassifications identified during the auditors’ work and that similar human services midyear adjustments have been typical in prior years (the finance director said 2024 adjustments were in the tens of millions).

Council adopted the June 5 amendment on a roll call (8 yes, 1 no). Later in the meeting the council voted to untable the May 15 amendment and adopted it by the same margin after additional questions and staff explanations. Record votes were taken for both adoptions.

Ending: The administration said the county expects the external auditors’ final report and the county’s general purpose financial statements by the end of the month; council members said they will review the finalized audit when available and follow up with additional questions about fund transfers and reporting practices.