Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Budget committee reviews month-end reports, open PO concerns and $820,000 encumbrance for 1500 building work
Summary
Budget and Finance reviewed January month-end reports, discussed restricted‑fund reporting and clarified that an $820,529 encumbrance tied to the municipal property known as 1500 reserves money for potential remediation and repairs but has not been fully spent.
At the March 10 Budget and Finance meeting, members reviewed end-of-month financial statements for January, discussed how restricted levies and the general bank account are reported, and examined an encumbrance list tied to an approximately $820,529 set‑aside for work on the municipal property commonly referred to as “1500.”
Finance reports: Finance staff presented a bank reconciliation and revenue/expense summaries for January and described the monthly-close process. Committee members asked for clearer, more palatable monthly reports that break balances out by restricted levies (police, fire, street) and suggested a deeper quarterly budget review to track year-to-date budget performance.
Restricted funds and reporting: Committee members expressed confusion about a single “general account” bank balance and requested supplemental reports showing fund balances by levy and by department. Finance staff said information is available in the city’s finance software and will provide customized reports on request.
Open purchase orders and ARPA encumbrance: Committee members reviewed an open-PO report showing encumbrances tied to multiple project lines; the meeting materials also included a packet showing how an approximately $820,529 ARPA allocation had been encumbered across possible uses: asbestos remediation, senior center roof repair, police department roof and wall work, public-works garage doors, salaries and other items. Finance staff clarified that the encumbrance reserves funds for potential projects but does not mean the money has already been spent; individual invoices and payments follow normal procurement and invoice review.
Records digitization and retention: The committee revisited a proposal to digitize council records. Staff noted the city has a vendor contract for scanning and that the process may require use of records-retention forms and Ohio History Connection guidance; the committee asked the clerk to confirm vendor capabilities and scope (whether the vendor will scan all files and perform indexing or whether the city must pre-sort). Members suggested staff return with options and clarified that this item pertains to council files and minutes rather than broader departmental records.
Fire levy legislation: Committee members asked for the Hamilton County auditor’s certificate showing estimated revenue for a fire-levy renewal; staff said the law director and clerk will provide the county auditor figures before the item is scheduled for final council action.
Next steps: Finance staff will provide requested fund-balance and restricted‑fund detail, follow up on the open-PO list, provide a status update on the 1500-project invoices, and confirm vendor scanning capabilities for council records.
