County financial consultant reviews draft 2025 budget; flags large assessed-value rise and accounting items

Scott (presenter) walked the Osage County Commission through a multi-page draft of the county—s 2025 budget and comparative materials, saying the county—s assessed valuation rose by roughly $10,000,006 and that the jump changes how much each mill of tax yield now generates. He told the commission the increase would raise the revenue produced by the existing mill levy without raising rates.

That assessment prompted the consultant to recommend the commissioners review cash reserves and how capital outlays are recorded. Scott noted the county—s ideal general-fund reserve (three to six months of operating expenses) and said several funds were below the seven-year averages he uses to track financial health. "If you say, 'I'm a bring on 5,000 a month, but you only bring 4,000 a month because it's locked in there'... before you know it, you're gonna use your credit cards," Scott said, arguing for clearer reserve targets and planned transfers to a capital-improvement or equipment-reserve fund.

Scott reviewed the Osage County Sewer District No. 1 budget in the packet and raised questions about a $536,000 line of miscellaneous receipts in 2024, asking whether it represented grants, special assessments or CDBG receipts. He said portions of the sewer project had been funded by a mix of CDBG and special assessments and that some grant receipts and passthrough accounting still need reconciliation. "We know because we're still on good graces with CDBG," he said, "I think there's just some miscommunication because obviously we had some turnover when that started."

On capital accounting, Scott explained that prior practice had placed departmental capital outlay into a separate capital fund. He proposed reorganizing the ledger so departments have equipment-reserve and capital-improvement funds with clear resolutions governing uses. "It'd be nice——to put this back where it belongs and then start a capital improvement fund," he said, describing a practice used in other counties that ties transfers to multi-year plans and allows tracked carryover for future capital projects.

Scott also presented spreadsheets showing seven-year histories by fund, cash balances, and an analysis of how much property owners would see the county—s revenue-neutral calculation change if the commissioners take no levy action. He recommended staff and commissioners work with Kramer Engineering (project manager on the sewer project, per the presentation) and the treasurer to reconcile project receipts and special-assessment postings before finalizing the sewer district budget.

Commissioners and staff asked clarifying questions about the sewer fund—s special-assessment mechanics and whether funds had been correctly routed through the county—s grant administration. Scott and county staff agreed to follow up with the treasurer and with Kramer Engineering Services for more detailed backup and to correct suspended or miscellaneous ledger items before budget hearings.

The presentation closed with Scott offering to revise the packet to reflect any changes the commission requests and to return with updated numbers at the next budget meeting. "Just tell me where you want me to go with it," Scott said, offering a path for commissioners to choose a revenue-neutral target or to use extra assessed-value revenue to seed capital reserves.

The commission did not take a final vote on the budget during this meeting; Scott identified follow-up items and asked the commission to provide direction ahead of the next hearing.