Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance Investment Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delaware County Board of Finance adopts investment policy, flags ordinance for final-maturity option
Summary
The Delaware County Board of Finance voted to approve a written investment policy and directed final legal review; the policy includes an ethics/conflict-of-interest section and a optional "final maturity" provision that would require a separate county ordinance to implement under Indiana law.
Get email alerts on the Finance Investment Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Delaware County Board of Finance on Oct. 20 adopted a written county investment policy and directed county legal counsel to complete a final review before formal publication.
The policy places the county’s investment management practices in writing, adds an ethics and conflict-of-interest section and includes a "final maturity" provision that would, if exercised, allow up to 25% of the county’s portfolio to be managed under that rule. Commissioners were told that invoking the final-maturity language would require a separate ordinance under Indiana Code 5-13-9-5.7.
Brad (presenter) said the draft was developed by comparing other counties’ and the state’s policies and incorporating feedback from local reviewers. The policy sets parameters for liquidity, stating the county’s current practice favors highly liquid instruments (for example, certificates of deposit and other short-dated instruments generally limited to two years) so the county can access cash quickly.
Commissioner Brand said the written policy is an early step in the county’s broader strategic capital plan and is needed before the county seeks a bond rating. One commissioner asked about the policy’s four-year expiration clause; the board discussed reviewing the policy annually and adjusting language later if market conditions warrant.
Attorney/finance questions raised at the meeting clarified that the final-maturity option in section 10 would not be effective without an ordinance passed by the county under the cited state code. The board voted to approve the policy pending the county attorney’s final review.
The board completed roll-call votes with all present members voting in favor. The document will return to the county attorney for final legal review and a subsequent publication step if no further edits are required.

