Budget Committee Denies $48 million Funding Request from Board of Education for School Construction Proposal

February 20, 2020
By: Dwayne Page

It may be back to the drawing board for the Board of Education.

Fearing that the board’s latest proposal for a multi pre-K to 8 school construction project was something the county could not afford long term and still be able to fund other future needs, the budget committee Wednesday night voted 5 to 0 to recommend that the full county commission deny the request for a minimum of $48,685,000. If the county commission agrees with the budget committee the Board of Education will have to revise its request to fund a less expensive school construction project.

Members of the budget committee are Dennis Slager, Sabrina Farler, Anita Puckett, Jeff Barnes, and Jerry Adcock, all members of the county commission.

In rejecting the request, the committee was not making a judgment on the plan itself, just on the county’s ability to pay for it.

Steve Bates, the county’s financial advisor, said while the county could issue bonds of $55 million to cover the school board’s request the annual debt payment to the county would be $3 million a year for up to 25 years and new revenue would be needed to fund it. Such a long term obligation would also hamper the county’s efforts to fund other needed projects in the coming years, such as perhaps another new school or jail.

“If you do $55 million at $3 million a year you’re looking at a minimum of a 60 cent property tax increase,” said County Mayor Tim Stribling.

When asked about a possible wheel tax to help fund it, Stribling said a $50 wheel tax would only generate about one million dollars a year and the property tax rate would still need to be raised by probably 40 cents.

The county commission can take action on its own to implement a wheel tax but passage requires at least a two thirds vote (10 out of 14) in support on two separate readings at least a month apart. Residents opposed to a wheel tax could mount a petition drive between the first and second readings to force a public referendum on the question.

Even if the county were to act now on tax increases, Bates said sufficient funding would not be in place for a school project until at least next spring.

“We can’t issue bonds right now, meet cash flow requirements, and take on that kind of debt right now. You don’t have the revenue in place and even if you adopted a revenue source now it probably won’t hit until next March anyway when taxes come in. Even with a wheel tax, February, March, and April are the biggest months for license registration and renewals so you are months behind even if we start now,” Bates continued.

“What is the long range vision is what I would ask the committee on what you want to do and how you want to get there in order to maintain a low tax rate and cash balances. I don’t care what you build. My job is to help you do it at the lowest cost and tax rate but $55 million will strap the county down for a long time because you have to worry about what comes after in 10 years if you need a jail. What happens if you need another school? That is where the long range planning will have to come in. You have to address how much revenue are you willing to raise and are you going to be okay with that for the next 25 years because if anything comes after that then its only to the extent you have paid off some debt that you have any debt capacity left,” said Bates

Should the county choose to fund a less expensive school construction plan, Bates said the payment schedule would be the same but for a shorter and more manageable term.

“I think the revenue stream that is required to keep you where you need to be financially will stay the same. If you do a $30 million bond issue the payment will still be $3 million to help you get to where you need to be but you can do it for 10 years rather than 25 years and pave the way for something else in 9 to 11 years and whether we take some out of the local purpose fund plus a wheel tax and property tax all that can be hashed out later. In 10 years you can knock it out pretty quickly and do something else but if you stretch it out to 25 years it ties you down a long time,” added Bates.

“In DeKalb County you have a debt management policy that says you will keep debt at 9% of assessed value which means about $42 million and debt per capita at $2,200. If you issue $55 million debt per capita it is probably going to be over $3,000 and 12% of assessed value which means you will have to amend your debt management policy,” said Bates.

“This county has been good over the years in managing . There have been people prior to this commission and budget committee who have managed debt well in the county and I think it is our duty to do that going forward,” said County Mayor Stribling.

February 20, 2020
By: Dwayne Page

Before the county budget committee got around to the business at hand Wednesday night dealing with a request for funding new school construction, it dealt its Chairman Dennis Slager a blow.

By a vote of 3 to 2, the budget committee ousted Slager as its chairman. The outcome is pending an opinion by the County Technical Advisory Service (CTAS) as to whether the move is legal. If it stands, Slager would continue to serve as a first district commissioner (to which he was elected) and member of the budget committee (to which he was appointed) but County Mayor Tim Stribling would step into the role as ex officio chairman of the committee.

Immediately after Slager called the budget committee meeting to order Wednesday night, fifth district commissioner and member of the committee Anita Puckett asked to speak and called out Slager for his take charge approach during a recent joint meeting between the budget committee and the Board of Education.

“In our meeting with the budget committee and the board of education, in my opinion Mr. Slager you dominated that meeting. You tried to control and manipulate the entire meeting. You shared your opinion as speaking for the whole committee,” said Puckett.

Slager countered that he did not deny anyone the opportunity to speak.

“I would hope that everybody at that meeting had the proper opportunity to speak. That opportunity was given many times and if you didn’t take that opportunity that is your fault,” he said.

During that meeting the budget committee heard directly from the Board of Education for the first time on its request for funding the construction of two new pre-K to 8th grade schools and renovating Northside to a pre-K to 8 facility. Slager offered a possible alternative to the project in which the county might be able to fund a pre-K to 2 school through a USDA financing program without a property tax increase. Slager said at the time he planned to share more details with the budget committee at a later meeting.

Puckett took offense to Slager’s having made that alternative public without first making the committee aware of it.

“Dennis your ideas for revenue should have been shared with the committee ONLY before it was ever discussed with the board of education or the public,” said Puckett.

Citing (TCA 5-12-104) regarding a 1957 county budget law and the makeup of the county budget committee, Puckett moved to remove Slager as Chairman of the budget committee and to make County Mayor Stribling the ex officio chairman of the committee.

“The committee shall consist of five members, one of whom shall be the county mayor and the other four shall be appointed by the county mayor with the approval of the county governing body at its regular January session each year or at any subsequent session. The county mayor shall be the ex officio chair of the budget committee and the director of accounts and budget shall be the ex officio secretary of the budget committee. I would like to make a motion that Dennis Slager be dismissed as chairperson of the budget committee and that Tim Stribling take the role of chairman,” said Puckett.

Sabrina Farler, second district commissioner and member of the budget committee, offered a second to the motion.

Before the vote, County Mayor Stribling said he planned to contact CTAS on whether the move is legal since DeKalb County operates under the Local Option Budgeting Law of 1993 which provides optional budgeting procedures for the county although it does not specifically address the makeup of the budget committee and states that “This act can work in conjunction” with (the 1957 county budget law).

Fifth district commissioner and budget committee member Jerry Adcock joined Puckett and Farler in voting to oust Slager as budget committee chairman. Sixth district commissioner and budget committee member Jeff Barnes joined Slager in voting no. Adcock later explained that his vote was not in opposition to Slager personally but in support of the county following the county budget laws.

Before the meeting adjourned, Slager had the last word telling Puckett that “you did not appoint me to this position and you are not taking it from me. If Mr. Stribling wants to dismiss me from this position then he has the authority to do that and not you. I am still your chairman of this committee until he dismisses me,” said Slager.

If the 1957 law is the guide, the county for years has apparently not strictly adhered to it in the makeup of the budget committee.

In the past as today, the budget committee has been comprised of five members, all county commissioners appointed by county mayors with the approval of the county commission, and one of the five commissioners has historically served as chairman. And while the county mayor has had input in budget committee discussions he has not served as a chair or a voting member of the budget committee.

(Read more specifics of the County Budgeting Law of 1957 and the Local Option Budgeting Law of 1993 BELOW)

Chapter 12 – County Budgeting Laws
Part 1 – County Budgeting Law of 1957
5-12-104 – Budget committee.

(a) A county budget committee is hereby created.

(b) (1) The committee shall consist of five (5) members, one (1) of whom shall be the county mayor, and the other four (4) shall be appointed by the county mayor with the approval of the county governing body at its regular January session of each year or at any subsequent session.

(2) The members of the committee need not be members of the county governing body.

(3) The county mayor shall be the ex officio chair of the budget committee, and the director of accounts and budgets shall be the ex officio secretary of the budget committee.

(c) (1) The county governing body may in its discretion allow members of the budget committee such compensation for their service as the commission may deem proper.

(2) Any provision for compensation, as well as provision for printing, publicity, supplies and other necessary expenses of the budget committee, shall be payable from the county general fund and shall be included in the annual appropriations.

(d) The budget committee shall perform all the duties respecting county budgets and appropriations now performed, or required to be performed, by the finance committee, tax levy committee or other committees of the county, and shall perform such other duties as provided in this part.

Local Option Budgeting Law of 1993

This act, codified at T.C.A. §§ 5-12-201 through 5-12-217, provides an optional budgeting procedure for all county departments that are funded from county appropriations. It may be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the county legislative body pursuant to T.C.A. § 5-12-201. This act provides a system through which a county may develop a consolidated budget for all county appropriations, adopt a tax rate and appropriation resolution to fund that budget, and specifies a deadline by which these actions must be taken. In brief outline, this procedure begins no later than February 1 of each year when the county mayor distributes to each department budget forms upon which to submit a proposed budget. T.C.A. § 5-12-206.

Additionally, the county mayor furnishes estimated revenue information to the departments of education and highways, based upon the assessor’s estimation of property valuation on or before March 15. The assessor is required to furnish his best estimate of the actual assessed value of all taxable property within the county for the ensuing year to the county mayor before March 15. T.C.A. § 5-12-207.

All departments, offices and agencies are required to submit a proposed budget to the county mayor or, if a finance director, director of accounts and budgets, or similar person is provided by law, to that official by March 1. Along with their proposed budgets, the departments of education and highways must also submit a form tax rate resolution showing how much property tax they are requesting to fund their budgets. Departments, offices and agencies are authorized to alter or amend their submitted budgets anytime prior to when the proposed budget is submitted to the county legislative body. However,the county mayor or budget committee decides whether to allow submission of changes to the proposed budgets after the consolidated budget is submitted to the county legislative body but prior to final approval. T.C.A. § 5-12-208.

Procedures for resolving disputes regarding changes made to the proposed budgets submitted by the various departments, offices and agencies are addressed in T.C.A. § 5-12-209. This act can work in conjunction with either of the other two local option budget laws or with private acts. The only portion of this budgeting plan that cannot be superseded by other general law or private act adopted by the county is found in T.C.A.§ 5-12-210.That section requires that the county legislative body adopt a budget, tax rate, and appropriation resolution no later than July 31. The county legislative body can adopt the budget as proposed by the department heads or as consolidated by the county mayor or budget committee. If the budget is not adopted before the beginning of the fiscal year on July 1, then the county operates on a monthly allotment, based upon the preceding year’s budget, during the month of July. If the budget still is not adopted by August 31, then the budget for the department of education will go into effect by operation of law in an amount equal to the minimum budget required to comply with the local match and maintenance of effort provisions of the BEP. If this occurs for three consecutive years, then the education budget in the third year will include a mandatory increase equivalent to 3% of the required local funding unless the LEA failed to comply with the applicable budgetary timeline. T.C.A. § 5-12-210.

Unlike the other local option budgeting laws, the August 31 deadline also applies to the rest of the budget. The operating budget for the remainder of county departments, excluding education, is the consolidated budget, including proposed amendments, that was submitted by the county mayor or the budget committee. This budget, together with the proposed tax rate and appropriation measures required to fund it, also becomes effective by operation of law if the county legislative body fails to adopt a budget, property tax resolution and appropriation resolution by August 31.

Finally, the act requires a balanced budget and contains provisions for adjustments if unanticipated circumstances are likely to result in a budget surplus or deficit. T.C.A. §§ 5-12-215 through 5-12-217. Procedures for amending a budget in effect are described in T.C.A. §§ 5-12-212, 5-12- 213.

February 20, 2020
By: Dwayne Page

The DCHS Lady Tigers punched their ticket to the semi-finals of the District 8AA basketball tournament Wednesday night after beating Cannon County 37 to 33 at Watertown.

The Lady Tigers will meet Macon County, the top seed and number one team in the state, on Friday night, February 21 at Tennessee Tech in Cookeville. In the previous two meetings this season, the Lady Tigers lost to Macon County 78 to 54 in Smithville on January 17 and 67 to 33 at Lafayette on February 11.

It was the third meeting between the Lady Tigers and Lionettes this season and the third win for DeKalb County.

In the game Wednesday night, DC led 12 to 10 after the 1st period, 15 to 10 at halftime, and 24 to 19 after the 3rd period before claiming a 37 to 33 victory.

Kadee Ferrell and Mya Ruch each scored 11, Emme Colwell 9, Kenzie France 4, and Megan Cantrell 2.

Meanwhile the York Institute girls defeated Watertown 48 to 39 in the tournament Wednesday night and will face Upperman, the 2nd seed, Friday night at 9 p.m. at Tennessee Tech.

Tonight (Thursday) the Tigers will take to the court to face Cannon County in the tournament at Watertown starting at 6 p.m. WJLE will have LIVE coverage.

The Smith County Owls will then face Watertown tonight at 7:30 p.m.

« First ‹ Previous 1 1483 1573 1581 1582 15831584 1585 1593 1683 2494 Next › Last »