Adams County removes cap on PMA investments; board requires six‑month review

Adams County Board of Supervisors · January 10, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board voted to remove a previous $5 million cap on investments with PMA so the treasurer and finance director can jointly invest funds quickly; the board added a requirement for a six‑month review (report due in July). Supervisors expressed caution about concentration risk; a local bank representative described pledged securities and networks that secure large deposits.

Adams County supervisors voted to remove a standing cap on investments with PMA to allow the treasurer and finance director to make joint investment decisions without returning to the administrative finance committee for each transaction.

Finance director told the board that the county originally authorized $5,000,000 with PMA and since then has placed an additional $4,000,000 there, for a total of about $9,000,000. "When we first started investing with PMA a few years ago, the administrative finance committee allowed us to move $5,000,000... I believe we've moved another $4,000,000. So we've invested a total of $9,000,000 with PMA," the finance director said.

Board members raised concerns about concentration risk, the availability of cash for county obligations, and penalties associated with early withdrawal of certain PMA notes. The treasurer said the office and finance department will coordinate investments and monitor cash flow; the treasurer also noted that local banks put money back into the community and that the county currently receives about 23 basis points more from 1 Community Bank than from the state's LGIP.

Supervisor Pease moved to approve removing the cap with the stipulation of a review in six months (reporting in July); the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. A representative from 1 Community Bank told the board that pledged securities and a network structure are used to secure larger deposits and that banks will compete on rate and service.

The transcript records the motion and approval by voice vote; no roll‑call tally is recorded.