MINUTES
OTHERS: Budget Dept.: Kate Carrano; CBAC: George Hosey, Barbara Strauss; Law Dept.: Alan Scheinkman; C.E.’s Office: Larry Schwartz, Michael Goodstein; BOL: Barbara Dodds, Sally Schecter, Chris Chang, Robert J. Boland, Tina Seckerson
Chairman Wishnie called the meeting to order at 10:15 a.m.
DISCUSSION: (There is a cassette tape on file for more detailed information)
MINUTES:
On motion of Legislator Young, seconded by Legislator Kaplowitz, the motion to approve the Minutes of August 16, 1999 was carried by a vote of 6-0.
2ND QUARTER FORECAST:
· Ms. Tooher distributed a hand-out (on file) with a column showing what the projected expenses would have been had the State budget not been adopted. At the end of the year we would have been projecting a $16.7 million fund balance, which is traditionally where we are at this point in the year.
· Expenditures: Relief: Projected 1999: $331 million. It would have been $329 million if the State did not impose an additional $2.3 million in expense that counties state-wide will absorb because the cost containments waivers were lifted for one-quarter of this year. Every provider of health care is now going back and rebilling the State MMIS for higher costs for providing in-patient and out-patient therapy for April 1st through June 30th of this year. The cost containment waiver was put back in place effective July 1st to March 31st of next year. Ms. Tooher explained that the concern as they look at the 2000 budget is that the cost containment will not be extended, or if it is extended we will run into the same problem as this year, there will be a quarter lap. On this line the appropriation is $333 million and they are now projecting $332 million so there is still appropriation left in this account. There would have been significantly more had the State not forced the County to eat another $2.3 million in expense.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – AUGUST 23, 1999
PAGE 2
· The gross Budget for County is currently $1,139,696,408. They are projecting expenses by the end of the year will be $1,048,591,797 leaving a variance of $91,104,611 in unexpended appropriation of which $85 million is the PBC loan guarantee. If you net out the PBC $85 million, it looks like there will be $6 million of savings.
· Mrs. Swanson requested a schedule of pilots.
· Departmental revenue appropriation is $87,569,109. Projected 1999 is $89,462,161. Mrs. Carrano stated that we will be over a little bit on revenue. Department of Corrections is over in revenue due to housing of federal prisoners. The number was close to 125 but has since dropped to somewhere around 98 since the opening of cells in NYC.
· County Clerk revenue is way above budget. There is a need for overtime in County Clerk’s Office due to the back-log of inputting of information because of the increased volume of real estate transactions. They will need additional hourly appropriation in order to meet the volume by the end of the year.
· Mrs. Carrano stated that they are anticipating that departmental revenue will exceed budget by about $1.9 million. It would actually have been $350,000 higher had the State not taken D&E Felon reimbursement away.
· The County was hit the hardest on federal and state aid. These are all the cuts in Social Services. Appropriation right now is $316.7 million which is tied to Relief spending. Now showing our projected as $314.4 million. They are under budget by $2.3 million. Mrs. Carrano stated that they would have been projecting $324.7 million of federal and state aid had the state and federal aid reductions not occurred. The reason they would have been showing over budget is because of a successful settlement of an old issue with the state on the administrative cap for social services that generated a settlement for the County of $11.5 million. That gets broken into two pieces. $6.1 million accrued on our books to prior year close-outs for social services revenue. The remaining $5.4 million comes into the County as unexpected, unbudgeted revenue. The other piece was from late April or early May, the state settled with the County on an old child care issue and gave us an additional $4 million in reimbursement. Again, this was unexpected and unbudgeted. The two combined are what has created a surplus. The County never received cash from those settlements. The state intercepted those checks and put it into the MMIS holding account. Which basically covers the County’s share of medical assistance. We never received the cash but it is still an accruable revenue. Mrs. Carrano stated that all of the rest gets eaten up by state cuts. Instead of showing a fund balance projection at this point in time of $16.7 million we are showing $3.7 million.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – AUGUST 23, 1999
PAGE 3
· $13 million hit due to state budget. Lose $10.7 in revenue and spend an additional $2.3 on the expense side in Medicaid costs.
· Projected Surplus before State Cuts $16,741,457
-3,100,000 MOE
-4,100,000 Food Stamps
-1,000,000 Managed Care
-700,000 Food Stamp Penalty
-1,500,000 DOT Operations
-2,300,000 Cost Cont. Expense
Projected Surplus 12/31/99 3,691,457
AGENDA REFERRALS:
#17 Settlement of Claims: Proposed Act authorizing the settlement of the County’s claims against Providence Washington Insurance Company. (7/26/99)
· The County Attorney explained that this legislation would authorize settlement of the County’s claims against Providence Washington Insurance Company (Surety) on two performance bonds issued to Port Chester Transportation Company, Inc. These bonds were issued in connection with two contracts for the transportation of preschool children with disabilities.
· In 1997 the Board of A&C declared Port Chester Transportation Company in default on three contracts for Transportation of Pre-School Children with Disabilities.
· The County made demand on the Surety for payment in full under the 3 Performance Bonds.
· Surety made payment in full ($13,000) for one contract and denied liability under the remaining two contracts. After extensive discussion, the Surety offered to make partial payment (50% on one and 75% on the other) This would result in a payment of $12,500 on a $25,000 contract and $29,250 on a $39,000 contract resulting in a total recovery of $41,750.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – AUGUST 23, 1999
PAGE 4
· According to the terms of the contract Port Chester was paid based on the number of students it transported. The contract contained an estimate of the number of children to be transported as well as a statement that the County was not responsible for variances between the estimates and actual number of students. Surety alleges that the disclaimer relating to the number of students expected to utilize this service was effective only if the variance was reasonable. Surety alleges that the variance between the number of students projected to be transported and the actual number transported was beyond a “reasonable range”. Surety claims that this was a cardinal change in the scope of work.
· The County disagrees with Surety’s position that the County made a cardinal change in the scope of work but the number of students actually transported by Port Chester did vary from the number projected in the bid specifications and had an impact on the payments received by Port Chester.
· In addition Surety alleges that the County used a different bidding formula in reletting two of the contracts. The County acknowledges that the Department of Health has changed its method of awarding these contracts. Although the problems encountered in this contract were not the reason for the change in methodology, this change should eliminate any similar claim in the future by a contractor or surety company.
· There was a lengthy discussion on the program and how it works. Mr. Schwartz explained to the Committee that this program is mandated by the state and the federal governments. The school districts dictate how many children need transportation. The school district then notify the County Health Department who works in conjunction with the County DOT. It is the County’s responsibility to coordinate the transportation program. The counties are no longer responsible for rate setting, that function was taken away and now lies with the State Education Department.
· The County budgeted $68 million for this program but Ms. Carrano stated that they are now projecting to spend closer to $7o million.
· Mr. Schwartz reminded the Committee that the County cannot be reimbursed until the school districts submit the proper forms to the state. He further stated that there have been ongoing meeting with regard to the program and reimbursement. Great strides were made this year in getting the state to agree to clear up the lag dating back to 1991.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – AUGUST 23, 1999
PAGE 5
· Mr. Mosiello questioned why this program is a County responsibility. Mr. Schwartz stated that that when back when the state decided that counties should administer and help pay for this program. He stated that he has been lobbying for changes since 1987 and continues to do so. He reminded the Committee that providers, parents and children who need these services are also lobbying the state and federal governments. The program is a major drain on all counties. He informed the Committee that the County has lost all arbitration cases in this matter.
On motion of Legislator Carsky, seconded by Legislator Young, the motion to approve this item was carried by a vote of 6-0.
RECEIVED & FILED:
On motion of Legislator Kaplowitz, seconded by Legislator Young, the motion to Receive and File Items II, 4 (court-ordered certioraris), 8 (gift), 9 (gift), and 33 (gift) was carried by a vote of 6-0.
A&C CALENDAR:
Mr. Boland reviewed the A&C Calendar for August 26th with the Committee.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further items for discussion, on motion of Legislator Mosiello, seconded by Legislator Kaplowitz, the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a.m.