Budget Commission Suspends Park Levy, OKs 2015 Budget
August 28, 2014

We don't have a resolution and we don't have a budget. Beverly Sustar

The Geauga County Budget Commission voted Monday to suspend collection of a 1986 park levy for one year after the Geauga Park District Board of Commissioners failed to submit a properly approved 2015 budget.

Approval of the proposed budget was tabled Aug. 12 so park commissioners could evaluate non-collection of the levy and prepare a revised budget that addressed nearly $9 million in carryover funds, including $3 million for capital land improve-ment projects.

Unlike the Aug. 12 hearing, however, interim Director John Oros sat alone before the three-member budget commission, consisting of Geauga County Prosecutor Jim Flaiz, county Treasurer Chris Hitchcock and county Auditor Frank Gliha.

None of the park commissioners — Lou Mucci, Mary Ruth Shumway or Brian Johnston — attended Monday’s meeting, nor did park district CFO Michele Pennell.

Oros asked the budget commission to approve a revised budget he presented, which included suspension of a 0.7-mill levy passed in 1986 for a period of six months.

“That would come at a cost savings of approximately $440,000 for the taxpayers of Geauga County,” Oros said.

The 1986 levy raises $880,000 per year for the county’s parks.

However, he was told suspension of the levy for six months was problematic for tax-collection purposes. Instead, the park district could either suspend collection of the levy for a minimum of one year or it could rollback the levy.

“We could roll it back to half of that millage, which would be in effect the same thing,” Deputy Auditor Beverly Sustar said. “Or, we could just suspend it for one year.”

Sustar added if the park district wished to resume collection of the levy, it would have to wait one year.

Oros said he understood some of the issues the budget commission raised last year regarding the park district’s large carryover and how past park boards and executive directors handled it.

“But given the position with an entirely new board of commissioners, we are going into a strategic planning process,” Oros said. “The park currently only has an interim director, in me. It would be nice to get an executive director on board. It would be nice if you could give us some time to further evaluate (the carryover issue).”

He said returning $440,000 to taxpayers was evidence of “some effort” to address that concern.

“I understand that there’s quite a bit (of carryover) projected for the end of year 2015, but we’re at least offering something,” Oros told the commission. “Quite frankly, I work for the board of park commissioners and I would have to go back to them and revisit the one-year issue.”

The park district, however, is facing a Sept. 1 deadline to have its budget approved.

Hitchcock noted the park district’s construction fund is not millage based, but is funded with general fund transfers.

“We really should take those amounts, merge them back into the general fund for the purposes of evaluating what the true estimated cash ending balance is,” he said. “So that means with this new estimate, you have $8.1 million over an anticipated expense budget of $7.2 (million). That’s only about 11 or 12 percent.”

Hitchcock added, “That is doable. However, the way this (revised budget) is produced with your construction fund, you have anticipated expenditures of $875,000. You have an estimated ending balance of $3 million. That’s 348 percent more than you anticipate spending.

“Typically with the county, all of the other entities that we look at, if you get close to 100 percent, we start to say be careful, that’s not your money, it’s the taxpayers’ money.”

If the construction fund were moved back into the general fund, the park district could argue the cash balance is not excessive, Hitchcock reiterated.

“But because this has been the process for years, this is what has my attention: $3 million of taxpayers’ money with no plan as to spending it other than about 900 grand,” Hitchcock told Oros. “That has my attention.”

Oros said he did not disagree with Hitchcock’s assessment, but added he was submitting and presenting what his board approved.

“I work for them and there’s little I can agree to outside of that,” he said.

Troy Township resident Ed Buckles asked Oros at which meeting the park commissioners approved the revised budget submitted to the budget commission.

“I don’t recall. I’ll have to let you know,” Oros replied.

“Because the issue of the rollback (non-collection of the 1986 levy for six months) that you say that you cannot speak for has never been approved by the (park) board to my knowledge, not at an open meeting,” Buckles said.

Answered Oros, “That’s correct. That’s correct.”

Flaiz asked Oros about Pennell’s whereabouts and was told she was at the doctor’s office.

“It’s your testimony this is a bona fide, approved budget by the park commissioners?” Hitchcock asked.

“That’s correct,” Oros responded.

Flaiz said he was inclined to approve a 2015 budget based on a full-year suspension of the levy. Hitchcock agreed.

But before a vote was taken, Newbury Township resident William McCullam asked the commission what authority it had to suspend collection, as he believed the park district fell under the jurisdiction of state government.

“It’s a political subdivision within this county and we are the budget commission authority for the park district. So it is under our authority,” said Flaiz.

Flaiz moved to approve a “hypothetical” tax budget Sustar prepared that reflected non-collection of the 1986 levy for one year.

“That’s not a budget that the (park) board has approved,” Sustar said, explaining non-collection of the 1986 levy would reduce the park district’s estimated carryover balance in the general fund from $5.9 million to $5.1 million.

“I guess the issue is we don’t have a budget that was approved, right?” Flaiz asked Sustar.

“We don’t have a resolution and we don’t have a budget,” she said.

Commission members made light of the lack of apparent support Oros had on his side of the table.

“I mean, I feel bad for you John,” Flaiz said. “I wish a board member were here or Michele (Pennell) was here.”

The county prosecutor repeated options available to the park district: Suspend collection a full year or cut the 0.7 mills in half and suspend collection over a 12-month period.

“But we still don’t have a revised budget or a resolution from the board,” Flaiz told Oros, acknowledging Oros simply was a “messenger.”

Budget commission members then voted unanimously to approve an amended budget that suspends collection of the 1986 levy for one year.