Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Special Projects Fund topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission debates use of $3.66 million special‑project reserve; tables allocation decision

3780785 · June 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioners discussed allocating a $3.66 million special‑project reserve (SPLOS) toward courthouse repairs, ambulances and other county needs but tabled allocation decisions pending further analysis and a building assessment; staff and commissioners debated whether to use the funds for tier‑1 SPLoSS projects or preserve them as a reserve.

The board spent extended time debating how to allocate a special‑projects line item holding approximately $3.66 million in LGIP and bank funds. Staff reminded the board that previous direction required any expenditures from that fund to return to the board for prior review and that the 2020 SPLoSS (sales‑tax special project) will expire Dec. 31, 2025, with a renewal on the November ballot.

Commissioners described competing priorities: courthouse roof and third‑floor work for which engineer EMC estimated about $1.2 million; ambulance purchases; and other county building repairs. One commissioner urged using the fund for courthouse work, noting the courthouse is a county‑wide benefit and that a SPLoSS tier‑1 project could have helped fund the work if included previously. Another commissioner cautioned against using all funds for building work and opposed buying ambulances from the reserve.

Staff said the recent land sale produced about $400,000 in the general fund that could be applied for building repairs and that auditors gave guidance on how to properly record and restrict land‑sale proceeds for courthouse repairs. EMC’s task order for courthouse design work includes a minimum one‑year workmanship guarantee, staff said.

After debate, a commissioner moved to table further allocation decisions and to return with a creative allocation plan and building assessments. The board agreed to discuss the matter at a future meeting and deferred spending while staff obtains a building assessment and further financial analysis.