Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee clarifies Prop 1 accounting, moves county share into Fund 22
Summary
Committee members agreed to keep the county's unincorporated Prop 1 receipts in fund 22 rather than fund 25, saying the restrictions are identical and the change avoids artificially inflating fund 25 balances.
During the midday session the Davis County Budget Committee discussed accounting for the county’s share of Prop 1 transportation sales-tax receipts and a recent change in how those receipts are shown in the county’s funds.
Speaker 1 explained that Prop 1 proceeds include city, county and UTA portions and that the county receives the unincorporated portion. Speaker 1 said the county had previously flowed receipts into fund 25 but is moving them to fund 22 because both accounts are subject to the same spending restrictions (Speaker 1 cited restriction language "59 12 22 12.2"). "I'm just gonna park it at 22 and not push it down to 25 because restrictions are the same," Speaker 1 said.
Speaker 2 and others confirmed that Prop 1 is a transportation sales tax, and the committee discussed the accounting change as a transparency and balance-sheet matter rather than a policy change in allowable uses. The committee did not take a formal vote in this preparatory discussion, and no new spending allocations were approved in the exchange.
The accounting move is intended to prevent Fund 25 from being artificially inflated by county receipts that should be labeled as Prop 1 (Fund 22) revenue; Speaker 1 said future Prop 1 payments and balances will be tracked in Fund 22 going forward. The committee paused recorded proceedings to receive the sheriff’s office presentation later in the afternoon.
