Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sarpy County CFO reports steady revenues, healthy reserves; board probes debt capacity
Summary
Sarpy County Chief Financial Officer Dan Tlaikas presented the Q2 FY2025 financial dashboard showing year-to-date revenue of $88.7 million (51% of budget), total cash of $94.8 million, and a self‑insurance fund running positive. Commissioners questioned implications for debt and bond rating as outstanding principal totals about $162.9 million.
Dan Tlaikas, Sarpy County chief financial officer, told the Board of Commissioners on Feb. 11 that the county had collected $88.7 million in revenue as of Dec. 31, 2024 — about 51% of the fiscal-year budget — while spending $103.7 million, or 37% of the expense budget.
Tlaikas said local revenues are running slightly above 50% because they were budgeted conservatively and that collecting 35% of property tax revenue by Dec. 31 is normal. He reported the county’s general fund cash at $20.3 million, which includes a $19 million reserve, and total county cash of $94.8 million as of Dec. 31.
The CFO also reviewed a new section of the dashboard for the county’s self-insurance health fund. "For the first six months of the fiscal year that fund is running positive, by almost a million dollars," Tlaikas said, listing $1,000,000 in employee contributions, $5.1 million in employer contributions and year‑to‑date claims and stop‑loss costs that left the fund with a roughly $3 million lifetime cash balance and about $1.4 million held as a reserve.
The board spent the bulk of its discussion on county debt. Tlaikas reported outstanding principal of about $142.9 million in governmental activities and $20 million in stadium‑related bonds. He called out a note payable tied to the 1102 Building that carries quarterly payments of $68,000 and a balloon payment of about $3.5 million at final maturity.
Commissioners asked whether the county could take on more debt and what effect additional issuance would have on the bond rating. Tlaikas cautioned he could not give a firm number without consulting the county’s financial advisor. "I don't know that I want to provide you a number without talking to our financial advisor about that," he said. He added there is a reasonable chance the rating could be downgraded on the next large issuance, depending on timing and amount.
County Administrator Bonnie Moore described steps the county will take before any new large issuance, including a formal scorecard with the financial advisor and conversations with bond counsel. "At this point, I would not have any concerns or express to the board any concerns that we'll have a change in rating," Moore said, adding the county has preserved cash reserves and issued past debt without a levy increase.
Board members asked for additional metrics on future reports, including debt as a percentage of operating budget and how much of highway allocation revenue is currently pledged to debt service. Tlaikas said roughly 50% of highway allocation revenue is now applied to debt service and noted that policy allows pledging up to 100% of that revenue to debt where appropriate.
There was no formal action on the dashboard presentation; staff said they will provide supplemental charts and requested metrics to answer commissioners’ follow-up questions.
