Jefferson County reports $3 million general-fund surplus; board to vote on $21.9 million in carryovers

Jefferson County Chief Financial Officer Mark Riser said the county closed 2024 with nearly a $3 million surplus in the general fund and presented a proposed set of carryovers and budget amendments for 2025.

Riser, the county's chief financial officer, told the Jefferson County Board of Supervisors that the largest single reason for the surplus was a $2,000,000 appropriation for the Live Local development fund that was planned for 2024 but not disbursed until 2025. “Would you like the good news first or the bad news? Just kidding, it's all pretty good,” Riser said as he opened his presentation. He also cited stronger-than-budgeted sales-tax collections and interest income, and $2.82 million in wages-and-benefits savings driven by vacancies, roughly $2 million of which occurred in the sheriff’s department.

Why it matters: The board must approve carryovers of unspent 2024 appropriations into 2025 and a small contingency transfer to cover department deficits. Those actions affect the county’s available fund balance for capital projects, the closing costs on a county building project, and the county’s reserve targets used in upcoming budget planning.

Riser walked supervisors through individual funds and the capital-projects picture. He said the capital projects fund retained about $160,004.77 for closing costs from prior land-sale proceeds and that the county currently holds roughly $897,000 in the capital projects fund while final costs to close the building project are expected to be about $1.2 million. To cover the gap, Riser proposed a $500,000 transfer from the general fund into the capital projects fund; he said that is feasible given the positive year-end results but presented it as an anticipated adjustment rather than a completed transfer.

Riser reviewed the fund-balance policy application the board uses to judge reserves. He reported an aggregate fund balance of $41,000,637,191 (as presented on the worksheet handed out to supervisors) and explained how nonspendable, restricted, committed and assigned balances are subtracted to arrive at available working capital. Under the county’s target (a three-month goal) the county is about $3 million short of the goal but remains above the two-month statutory requirement.

Riser also summarized department-level results: the health department posted about $65,000 in net positive results aided by ARPA-funded program shifts; human services ended with about $108,000 positive; the highway shop showed roughly an $825,000 surplus largely reflecting a transfer from the general fund tied to the Highway D bridge project; and the fleet fund was about $130,000 positive after delaying vehicle purchases.

Carryover and amendment requests: Riser and administration presented a multi-line set of carryover requests and proposed budget amendments. Key figures recorded in the packet and discussed include: - Total proposed carryovers from 2024 to 2025: $46,773,757.21, of which $21,935,422.21 required county-board approval; - Proposed contingency transfer to cover department deficits: $27,509.76 (to be moved from contingency to various departments); - Specific carryover requests called out in discussion: $2,000,000 for Live Local Development Fund (disbursed in 2025), $500,000 proposed transfer to capital projects for building close-out costs, $500,000 carryover for strategic plan initiatives from land-sale proceeds, $121,000 remaining for the interurban trail, a $1,500,000 order for six quad-axle units for highway operations, and other department-specific requests (detailed in department carryover sheets).

Supervisors asked procedural and scope questions about items on the carryover list. One supervisor asked whether in-house work at the parks shop had been bid; Riser said much work was performed in-house and that bidding likely was not required when county crews perform the work. The sheriff’s office reported saving money by switching from planned bidirectional amplifiers (BDAs) to an application approach for radio monitoring, freeing up roughly $20,000 back to the county.

Board action and next steps: In the same meeting the board approved two related resolutions requiring two-thirds votes. The board approved a transfer from contingency to cover department deficits (moved by Supervisor Jones; second by Supervisor Jayco) and later approved the larger set of carryover requests totaling $21,935,422.21 that needed board approval (moved by Supervisor Jones; second by Supervisor Jayco). Both two-thirds votes passed with the roll-call result announced as 29 yes, 1 no, 0 absent. The finance director was authorized to make the necessary budget adjustments to enact the carryovers.

What remains tentative: The proposed $500,000 transfer from the general fund into the capital projects fund to finish the courthouse/building project was described as an anticipated adjustment tied to carryovers rather than a completed transfer; supervisors will see the detailed carryover sheets and the finance director will bring formal budget adjustments for the board to enact.

Ending: Riser said the county will complete a fund-balance (reserve) study with the Government Finance Officers Association by August 2025 to help refine the county’s working-capital goal. He warned that the county expects slower sales-tax growth in 2025 and rising cost pressures on wages and benefits, and that the board will receive follow-up information during the 2026 budget cycle.