Subscribe Today!
View the Online Newspaper
Welcome
Search: Site   Web
Print Story | E-Mail Story | Font Size

Most Commented Stories

What is this?

Save & Share this Article

County budget approved

The Glenn County Board of Supervisors approved an $89.5 million budget Tuesday after slashing nearly $3 million from county departments and dipping into reserves.

The adoption of the budget came a full two-weeks before the county was required to finalize spending for 2008-2009.  

Finance Director Don Santoro said this year has been especially difficult, yet department heads responded to the crisis with innovative methods to reduce the overall shortfall, including researching appropriate use of funding sources that could replace general fund obligations.

“The effect of these innovations was to ensure a consistent level of services, with only a minor inconvenience or delay of interdepartmental services or projects,” Santoro reported to the board.

While supervisors kept their promise not to gut public safety, departments such as public works and agriculture were hard hit, though both departments proposed long-term strategies to what is believed to be long term budget problems.

Planning Director Dan Obermeyer said the latest reductions left planning and public works with a 30 percent cut, from $2.2 million to $1.5 million.

A portion of the reduction was addressed by bumping fees paid for services and permits. Suspended are flood control projects, except during emergencies, and the general plan update project.

David Shoemaker, Glenn County Chief Administrative Officer, said that except for required elements, such as housing, the general plan update will “go to sleep” for at least a year, as planners necessarily get diverted to environmental and road projects.

The county also reduced janitorial services at county facilities from 5 days a week to 3 days a week, and reduced surveyor services.

As a long-term solution, Obermeyer proposed changing building inspection services from a general fund obligation to an enterprise fund, which will allow permit revenues to be carried from one year to the next.

Mark Black, agriculture commissioner, said cuts to his department could impact his ability to collect revenue.

The agriculture department has one biologist on leave, one biologist position being left vacant and one retiring in November, making it a challenge to fulfill its work commitments, reported Black.

Although supervisors warn the county’s fiscal concerns will continue, the federal government did come through with its payments “in lieu of taxes” on federal land in county jurisdiction. The unanticipated revenue did allow the board to restore some funding to struggling departments, Shoemaker said.

The board restored a $13,000 cut to UC Cooperative Extension and 4-H and a $6,800 cut to the libraries.

Supervisors also agreed to fund $4,900 for special training for the three new supervisors.

Shoemaker said the budget reflects a $1.6 million decrease in General Fund spending from last year, down from $24.9 million to $23.3 million.

The county has reduced it general fund employees by 31 positions, most of which are vacant and/or frozen, Shoemaker said.

The overall budget increased from $87 million to $89.5 million.

Shoemaker said he doesn’t expect the economy or the stalled housing market to improve anytime soon.

“People use to buy houses as an investment,” he said. “Now we are back to the way it use to be with people buying a house to live in.”

Shoemaker said that one the new supervisors take office in January, the board will begin working on the budget.

“We’re going to start early,” he said. “The state legislature is already working on a $8 billion shortfall this year, and they tend to deal with deficits by trying to pass them on to the cities and counties.”

Contact Susan Meeker at 934-6800 or smeeker@tcnpress.com.


See archived 'Local News' stories »
 

Click to vote
Recommend this story?
Yes
No
The online vote:


ADVERTISEMENT 
ADVERTISEMENT 
Poll
Do you support the Crystal Geyser project?
Do you support the Crystal Geyser project?
Yes, we need the jobs.
No, we need to protect our groundwater.
I don't care either way.
Enter The Code To Vote
 
Read Related Article
powered by
google
Search
        Search: Web    Site