Kossuth County supervisors ask staff to finalize cost-sharing, budgeting for emergency services complex

Kossuth County Board of Supervisors on Feb. 11 asked staff to finalize how the county will charge and account for rent, utilities and repair funding for the county's emergency services/training complex (referred to in the meeting as the UBC building). Supervisors asked department heads for a joint meeting next week to settle percentages and directed staff to create a budget structure to collect and restrict any rent revenue for building maintenance.

The supervisors said the working allocation under consideration is 45%/45%/10% across the three primary users (two entities at 45% and a third at 10%) for utilities and related shared costs, and they asked staff to prepare a rental agreement and revenue line so funds could be earmarked for repairs and improvements rather than flowing directly back to the general fund. The board discussed a staff proposal to set aside a target reserve (a $20,000 figure was floated during the meeting) to cover medium-term repairs and maintenance.

Why it matters: the county bought the emergency complex in recent years and now is formalizing how multiple public emergency entities that use the facility will share operating costs. Supervisors emphasized they are not seeking profit from rent; rather, they want a sustainable way to pay for utilities, repairs and replacements so those costs do not fall unpredictably on the general fund or on individual departments in future years.

Most substantive discussion focused on three items: (1) whether to charge rent and how to split utilities and other shared costs; (2) how to record the revenue and expenses in the county budget so money for building repairs is restricted and tracked; and (3) whether to create a standalone department or department number (similar to the election center example cited in the meeting) to manage building finances separately from the supervisors' general-account lines.

On cost-splitting, supervisors said the 45/45/10 allocation had been discussed previously and appeared to be the working baseline. Several supervisors noted that for accurate monthly claims the county would need to split each monthly bill according to the agreed percentages, but they also discussed alternatives such as making a single annual settlement based on prior-year actuals (to reduce bookkeeping entries). Staff said either method is possible but that monthly splitting is required if the board wants exact monthly accounting; an annual reconciliation was presented as a simpler administrative option.

On budgeting and bookkeeping, supervisors asked Tammy (identified in the discussion as the county staff member handling budgets and claims) to prepare account numbers and to transfer historical expenses related to the facility into the new department or line items if the board approves that structure. Board members discussed placing rent revenue into a restricted department fund so dollars collected for the building would be kept aside for maintenance and not revert to the general fund as unearmarked year-end savings.

Supervisors also discussed practical details raised during the review: what each tenant uses in the building (vehicle storage, equipment, occasional meetings and training), whether certain county departments (for example, sheriff or ambulance/EMS) should be charged rent given their funding sources, and the administrative workload associated with monthly splits versus an annual reconciliation. The board noted some entities already lack budget flexibility (for example, EMS levy limits were discussed) and said the final plan should take those constraints into account.

Next steps recorded in the meeting: supervisors asked staff to invite the affected department heads (EMA, EMS, 911 and sheriff representatives were specifically named as stakeholders during the discussion) to a focused meeting next Tuesday to finalize percentages and practical mechanics; to prepare a draft rental agreement and spreadsheet showing splits; and to identify the specific account numbers and department structure (building repair/maintenance, utilities, revenue/rent) so the items can be reflected in the coming budget. Supervisors also discussed the option to add a restricted revenue line and a corresponding building repair expense line in future budgets so funds collected for the complex would be available for future repairs such as HVAC or roof work.

The board made no formal adoption of a rent schedule or lease at the meeting; supervisors agreed to reconvene with department heads next week and to move forward if the parties do not agree on alternate percentages. The board concluded the agenda item by confirming staff will circulate the draft documents and cost spreadsheets in advance of the meeting so the group can reach a decision efficiently.