Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget Jail Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Osceola County board debates using reserve and levy options to help pay jail project
Summary
Board members discussed tapping reserve funds and adjusting levy rates to help fund a county jail remodel and equipment needs, weighed alternatives including a targeted public-safety line item and possible use of the health insurance reserve, and asked staff to refine payoff and repayment options.
Osceola County board members spent a lengthy portion of the meeting reviewing proposed budgets and discussing ways to pay for a jail remodel and related public-safety needs, including equipment and temporary cash-flow options.
The discussion centered on three options: (1) create a dedicated line item in the public-safety budget to direct currently budgeted town/county contributions into a jail account; (2) increase the general supplemental levy (scenarios discussed included raising it from the current 85¢ to $1.00 or $1.10); or (3) temporarily borrow from the county health-insurance reserve and consult the state auditor on repayment and interest requirements.
Why it matters: board members said the county faces a roughly $1.2 million funding target for the jail project and want a plan that does not simply continue growing the county’s ending fund balance. Several supervisors urged using existing budget lines or reserves to “spend down” the public-safety reserve while keeping town contributions at current levels, rather than increasing levies to grow reserves further.
Board members discussed details of levy capacity and fund balances. County staff noted the county could raise the general basic levy up to $3.50 and that the general supplemental levy is currently at about 85¢; staff showed scenarios that would leave a projected general supplemental fund balance near $100,202 at a $1.00 levy and higher if the levy were raised to $1.10. The board discussed prior practice of keeping some assistant and deputy positions’ pay levels aligned across county offices and reviewed how specific funds (for example, the “priority money” from a past lawsuit and bond proceeds for the jail remodel) are currently earmarked.
Several board members argued for establishing a named jail account (a line item inside public safety) that would use the same funding level as last year but direct the dollars toward the jail project, reducing the county’s large ending fund balance without increasing towns’ contributions. One member framed the approach as maintaining current town and county contributions but putting the dollars to a defined facility purpose rather than continuing to accumulate reserves.
Board members also raised procedural questions about borrowing from the health-insurance fund. Staff reported the county auditor and a finance contact recommended consulting the state auditor’s office on whether such an advance would require repayment and how to calculate interest. One staff member said state guidance differed in prior examples and recommended confirming the treatment before any transfer.
Other budget items that intersected with the jail discussion included: potential use of hotel/motel funds for museums, a roughly $47,000 opioid fund balance with no immediate plan, and a $23,503 balance in an emergency-medical fund after an accounting change to move motor-vehicle revenue into the ambulance fund. Staff said some equipment needs (fingerprint scanner/radios) might be eligible for E911 or grant funding; the EPG grant was mentioned as a recurring source that offsets part of emergency-management wages.
No formal budget vote was taken at this meeting. Board members directed staff to prepare figures and, where appropriate, to consult the state auditor’s office so the board can present a clearer proposal to the public-safety commission and towns at the next meetings.
The meeting closed with routine adjournment.
