HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06031986 - 2.1 (2) THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 2. 10
Adopted this Order on June 3, 1986 , by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson, Powers
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: The Proposed County Budget for the 1986-1987 Fiscal Year
Phil Batchelor, County Administrator presented to the
Board this day the proposed County Budget for the 1986-1987 fiscal
year. He commented on the challenges encountered by management in
striving to continue to provide a quality level of service to the
public with inadequately funded State and Federal programs mandated
in the County at this time. Mr. Batchelor advised that even though
the Proposed Budget represents a balanced revenue and spending
program that can be maintained, it fails to provide funds for adult
protective services and children's services; increased alcoholism,
drug abuse, and mental health problems; additional deputy sheriff
positions for patrol; maintenance and repair of the road system in
the unincorporated areas; additional probation officer positions;
and funding for critically needed capital projects. The County
Administrator noted that while the Proposed Budget provides a
balanced financial approach, there are a number of factors which
could upset the County' s budget plan, such as reduction of the
Federal deficit, State revenues, the State' s "Gann Limit" , public
assistance, public protection, health and sanitation, and increased
insurance costs.
Kerry Harms, Assistant County Administrator, commented on
the budget process. She noted that the State budget is still under
consideration and that many of the programs are partially or fully
funded by State allocations. She advised that the Proposed County
Budget was prepared with the best information available but that
until the State Budget is adopted, the County has no assurance that
State revenues will be received at the level proposed. She stressed
the need for caution. Ms. Harms recommended that the Board approve
the following recommendations:
1 . Continue the policy recommended by the County' s fiscal
advisors of maintaining a minimum contingency level and moving
toward establishment of a 5 percent level as soon as feasible;
2 . Reaffirm the policy that if additional program augmen-
tations are recommended above the level in this Proposed Budget, a
corresponding reduction must be identified elsewhere in the budget;
3 . Direct the County Administrator to review all revenue
and expenditure estimates and prepare a report on latest adjustments
for consideration during budget deliberations;
4 . Direct that if increased one-time discretionary reve-
nues are identified as a result of this review, priority con-
sideration be given to funding critical unfunded items, with
preference given to one-time expenses so the budget can be insulated
from the anticipated loss of several major revenue sources, such as
General Revenue Sharing.
5 . Adopt this document as the 1986-1987 Proposed Budget;
6 . Order publication of the required legal notices; and
7 . Set July 21 , 1986, at 10:00 a.m. as the starting date
and time for committee-of-the-whole deliberations on the budget
document, and July 30, 1986 , at 10:00 a.m. for the Board of
Supervisors to begin 1986-1987 final budget hearings.
Supervisor Powers expressed concern with Recommendation
No. 2 in that it could be an unrealistic restriction.
Supervisor McPeak proposed that Recommendation No. 2 be
amended to read:
Reaffirm policy that if additional program augmentations
are recommended above the level in this proposed budget, a
corresponding reduction must be identified elsewhere in
the budget or additional revenue must be identified and
dedicated to the program.
Board members discussed the Proposed Budget and concurred
with the recommendations of the County Administrator as amended by
Supervisor McPeak.
Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that recommendations
of the County Administrator with the exception of Recommendation No.
2 are APPROVED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Recommendation No. 2 as amended
is APPROVED.
I horehy codify that thIt is a true and correct copy of
an Action taker:and entered on the minute3 of the
Board of Supervisory on the slate shown.
ATTESTED: 3 21t. ---_
PHIL BACHELOR,Glerh of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
•
By Deputy
Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board
cc: Finance Committee
County Administrator
Auditor-Controller