Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richardton-Taylor board reviews preliminary 2024-25 budget and flags reporting discrepancy
Summary
Board members examined the preliminary 2024-25 budget, questioned interest and CD treatment, and instructed staff to reconcile a beginning-balance discrepancy between the district software and DPI Finance Facts before the levy is finalized.
The Richardton-Taylor School Board reviewed its preliminary 2024-25 budget, with members pressing staff on how interest income and CD maturities are reported and asking for a summarized payroll report before the district’s October submission.
Staff (S3) walked the board through the worksheet columns that show actuals, the tentative budget submitted to the county, and the version the board must finalize by Oct. 10. The discussion focused on where interest income is recorded: a general fund line budgeted at roughly $19,150 and a separate fund (fund 08) that holds CD and investment interest. A board member noted the $19,000 figure appears low compared with recent receipts and CD yields on hand.
Principal (S8) and other members flagged a roughly $500,000 CD that matures in a later fiscal cycle; staff said the CD’s maturity date determines whether its interest is booked in FY24 or FY25. ‘‘It depends when it matured on what report it’ll show up on,’’ S4 said. Staff reiterated that interest that hasn’t yet matured would appear in the year it matures, not necessarily the year shown elsewhere in the draft.
The board also identified a more urgent reporting issue: the beginning balance on the district’s printout did not match DPI Finance Facts and changed during testing of the vendor software (Software Unlimited). S3 told the board the number had shifted during a re-run of the report (from 1.9 million to 1.4 million) and that the vendor advised not to manually override the balance. A board member said, ‘‘So you’re off by millions of dollars,’’ and asked staff to continue troubleshooting with the vendor before the levy is finalized.
Board members asked staff to prepare a summarized payroll view and additional fund-level clarifications for the October meeting. No final vote on the budget occurred that night; the board signaled it would return to the certificate of levy and the expenditure detail at the October meeting.
What’s next: staff will continue to reconcile the beginning-balance discrepancy with the software vendor and will provide a payroll summary and updated fund-revenue detail to the board ahead of the Oct. 9 meeting.
