DeSoto council reviews November and December 2024 financial reports, requests ARPA and grant details

Assistant Finance Director Lakita Sutton presented the City of DeSoto—s financial reports for November and December 2024 during the Jan. 21 council meeting, telling the council the city was on typical seasonal patterns for the start of the fiscal year and that some major revenue sources had not yet been received.

Sutton said the general fund budget was roughly $64 million; as of the end of November the city had collected about $2.9 million (4.6 percent of the general fund), and by the end of December property tax collections had risen to 48.4 percent of the expected levy. She reported the public utility fund and sanitation fund were generally tracking to expectations, noting specific line items such as meter water sales (about 18 percent in November, 25 percent in December) and sanitation year-to-date receipts against a $7.3 million budget.

Councilmembers asked for follow-up on several expense and revenue lines that exceeded the point-in-year norms. Council member Perrette Parker asked why expenses in the senior center and housing finance court were above 25 percent; Sutton said she would research the items and provide answers. Council member Berg asked about a nondepartmental liability-insurance line that shows a high percent of expenditures; Sutton explained the city fully funds certain insurance liabilities early in the fiscal year, which front-loads spending in those lines. Council member Crystal Chisholm pressed about police overtime trends; Sutton and the city manager said they would review police overtime details and return a report. The city manager said staff would provide the requested information by the end of the week (Friday).

Council members also raised questions about American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) federal grant activity reported in the December "other funds" page. Council member Nicole Raphael pointed out an "other funds" line (federal grant ARPA) showing $0 budgeted for FY25 but $345,750 in expenses; staff explained the $7.3 million of ARPA funds were awarded in prior years and that individual projects were funded from that balance even without a FY25 line item until a budget amendment is brought forward. Development-staff noted one ARPA award funds a $1,000,000 shoreline/stormwater drainage project that had engineering and construction phases under way. Sutton said staff would prepare a budget amendment and a full list of ARPA projects and expenditures and return it to council; the city also noted ARPA expenditures are subject to federal reporting and single-audit thresholds.

Other follow-ups requested by council included: details on the regional jail line showing large expenditures in the general fund, clarification on sanitation personnel costs that were higher than the point-in-year benchmark, and the cadence for quarterly investment reports (staff said the reports normally post 30 days after quarter close). Staff agreed to provide the audit and project documentation the council requested and to consider posting summarized TCEQ/pretreatment and ARPA project material to the city website for public reference.

The presentation and follow-up questions took up a substantial portion of the meeting; staff committed to written responses to council by the end of the week and to provide documentation for the council and the public showing ARPA project allocations and the specific items that drove the December ARPA spending figure.