11/17/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

/ NOV 17 1992 8 47 When the Council on Aging submitted the FY 1991-92 trip equipment grant application to the Board of County Commissioners for approval, there was no specific request for funding from the Board of County Commissioners for the local match. Therefore, no funds were allocated for this purpose by the Board in its FY 1991-92 or FY 1992-93 budget. The Board, however, did include an amount of $158,822 for the Council on Aging°in its FY 92-93 budget. Since the Council on Aging has various sources of funding and given that the Council on Aging did not request funding from the Board of County Commissioners for the cash match, county staff assumed that the Council on Aging had sufficient funds to provide the local cash match. According to the Council on Aging, they have no funds to provide the local cash match for the FY 91-92 trip equipment grant. For that reason, they have requested that the county provide the $9,056 cash match. Since no funds were budgeted by the Board of County Commissioners for the Council on Aging trip equipment grant local match, the only source of funds, if the Board were inclined to provide the local cash match, would be general fund contingency. Providing the requested funds would involve a budget amendment and a funding allocation. Being less than two months into the 1992-93 fiscal year, the contingency fund must still provide for unexpected, non - budgeted expenditures for ten more months. There is no question that the funding requested by the Council on Aging would be money well spent. As indicated by various studies, there is a substantial amount of transportation disadvantaged unmet need. There is, however, an established budget process through which all county funding requests are expected to go. Not only does this ensure that each request is evaluated on its merit in relation to others; it also provides an opportunity for the Board of County Commissioners to incorporate all projected expenses in its approved budget.. ALTERNATIVES The Board of County Commissioners has two principal alternatives. These are: 1. Appropriate $9,056.00 from the county's general fund/contingency account and provide the local cash match for the FY 91-92 trip/equipment grant; or 2. Decline to provide the requested funding, requiring that the Council on Aging find an alternate funding source for the local match. RECOMMENDATION _The. staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consider the Council on Aging's request and, if appropriate, provide the $9,056 local cash matchptor the trip equipment grant. The staff further recommends that the Board inform all agencies that all known expenditures must be approved through the established budget process. 80