State board approves Floyd County budget actions, but notes improper stipend

By Bob Steenson, bsteenson@charlescitypress.com

In an action that was finished half a minute after it started, a state board ruled Monday that Floyd County does not have to change its budget for the upcoming 2022-23 fiscal year despite significant property tax increases, but it did say that the county supervisors improperly approved a small stipend for extra duties performed for the board by the county auditor.

A hearing on a protest of next fiscal year’s Floyd County budget was forced by 274 county residents who signed a petition. The hearing was held May 11 at the county fairgrounds and lasted more than an hour and a half. The decision on that hearing was made by the State Appeal Board at its regular meeting Monday afternoon, and took 32 seconds.

The State Appeal Board is made up of Iowa Treasurer Michael Fitzgerald, Auditor of State Rob Sand and Director of the Department of Management Kraig Paulsen, although Sand was absent Monday.

After a few other matters on the agenda, Paulsen, the chair of the board, moved on to the Floyd County protest. He asked if there was any conversation or questions regarding the May 11 hearing panel’s report and recommendation, which the board members had received prior to the meeting but which had not been released to the public.

There was no discussion and the recommendation passed 2-0.

The petitioners, represented at the May 11 meeting by the Coalition for Better County Government, had alleged that the county had not properly notified the public regarding various aspects of the budget approval process.

The group also argued that the county did not properly maintain meeting minutes or record votes, had improperly increased taxes rather than reduce spending, and planned to improperly spend American Rescue Plan Act money on the new law enforcement center and courthouse update project.

The panel which held the hearing at the fairgrounds was made up of four representatives of the state treasurer’s office, auditor’s office and the Department of Management.

The panel’s 10-page report, which the Press received after the Monday afternoon meeting, includes a summary of the arguments made by Coalition representative Michael Byrnes, a Mason City attorney, and the county’s response by Supervisor Chair Doug Kamm and Auditor Gloria Carr, as well as a summary of the pertinent Iowa laws and the panel’s recommendation.

The report said that a member of the panel had reviewed the county’s evidence of posting public notices regarding budget public hearings and found them to be in order.

The Coalition had especially contested the posting of that information on the county’s website and the auditor’s Facebook page, but the panel’s recommendation said that Carrie Johnson, property valuation and county budget administrator with the Iowa Department of Management and the presiding officer at the May 11 hearing, had viewed the newspaper proof of publications and the notices on the county web site and auditor’s Facebook page, and information submitted by the county auditor regarding the web site posting, and “determined they were substantially compliant with the statutory publishing and posting requirements.”

“The statutory language requiring posting of notice on website/s and social media includes no requirement for proof of such electronic publication. Floyd County attested to proper notification via the resolution to approve the Maximum Levy,” it wrote.

The report also said the double-digit increase in property tax rates which the Coalition protested “is caused by the effort to increase General Supplemental Fund balance from minus-$596,043 to $493,036 and to cover budgeted expenditures,” and then cited the portion of the Iowa Code which covers the things that the basic property tax levies and supplemental levies can be used for.

Regarding the use of ARPA funds, the report which the State Appeal Board approved said that, “Expenditures for the Law Enforcement Center/Courthouse would be an allowed use of those funds under the U.S. Department of Treasury document ‘Coronavirus State & Local Fiscal Recovery Funds – Overview of the Final Rule.’”

It said there were four things that the money specifically could not be used for, and a jail and other construction were not among those four things.

The order approved by the State Appeal Board states, “The petitioners did not meet the burden of proof requirement to justify a reduction in the FY2023 budget. The county met the burden of proof requirement for the increases in the FY2023 budget.”

The one area where the State Appeal Board required a change in the budget had to do with a $1,000 annual stipend which the Board of Supervisors had approved for Auditor Carr, because of the extra work she does for the board regarding budgeting and other items that is not part of the statutory requirement of her position.

The state board ruled that the state auditor had previously determined in a case in Decatur County that additional pay for elected officials above that recommended by the county compensation board could not be approved by the supervisors and was a violation of state statute.

The board’s formal order approved Monday states, “Based on the information provided by the parties involved and the Iowa Code, the State Appeal Board sustains the FY2023 budget as adopted, with the exception of a $1,000 reduction to expenses to void the improper stipend provided the County Auditor.”

Supervisor Linda Tjaden said after the state board meeting was over, “I believe we have demonstrated we are following the Code of Iowa regarding meeting notices, agenda and minutes and being transparent to the citizens of Floyd County. We also have shown we met the burden of proof for the increases to our Fiscal Year 23 budget.”

Tjaden said regarding the $1,000 stipend for Carr, “I would like to say that our auditor is doing more than required under the Code of Iowa regarding responsibilities as an auditor.”

She said the supervisors had looked at the possibility of hiring someone to take on the extra duties that Carr has been doing, but decided it would be less expensive to pay Carr a little extra to continue performing those tasks to assist the supervisors.

The county board “decided to follow other counties in providing a stipend to the auditor for increased workload,” she said. “We will work with our Attorney’s Office to find a way to compensate accordingly.”