By Myrna Trauntvein
Times-News Correspondent
Some steps need to be taken to assure that, as
equipment wears out at the landfill, there will be money to
replace it.
The way funds are currently handled, said Denton
Alexander, with Hawkins Coward & Simister, independent
auditors hired to perform an annual county audit.
Ultimately, the problem will end up in the laps of
commissioners and the county and not JRDA (Juab Rural
Development Agency).
"The county's landfill operation fund had a deficit
retained earnings balance at December 31, 2004," said
Alexander.
He recommended that the commission explore ways to
generate net income in the landfill fund to restore the
retained earnings balance.
While the county renegotiated the contract amounts to
be paid from JRDA to the county which should, over time,
result in profitable operations and restore the equity.
"There is an argument for an increase money, even
retroactive funds,because it is not legal to have a
deficit."
Accumulatively, from the inception of the landfill
coming under county jurisdiction, the landfill has built up
a comprehensive debt of approximately $135,000.
Traditionally, money has come from depreciation on
equipment, however, the board running JRDA is not willing to
pay depreciation.
"Also, money is not being put aside for new
equipment," said Robert Steele, commissioner.
"You are upside down on the landfill," said
Alexander.
The depreciation of equipment is more than the amount
being used to pay off the loan the county has.
JRDA, he said, has been putting money into a property
rehabilitation account, required by law. That money is to
pay for costs of closing and covering the landfill to meet
EPA standards when it becomes necessary.
However, said Alexander, the fund, in ten days time,
will be at a level where some of the money now being put
there can be diverted to other areas of need.
"They will always have to put money into the fund," he
said. "They are at the point where they (JRDA board) have
met the obligation and will still need to meet that
obligation."
However, some of it could be diverted to a
depreciation fund where money could accumulate to replace
some of the expensive equipment required at the
landfill.
"The track loader will not last as long as the loan,"
said Mike Seely, county administrator.
The heavy equipment is subject to a lot of hard use,
some of it over extremely rocky terrain, and it will need
replacement or a new engine in the not too distant
future.
He was not encouraging an increase in fees to users
but in the way the money was being allocated.
The operation loan is in the county's name and the
debt is in the county's name, said Alexander. However, there
needs to be a transfer of funds to allow a fund to be
established to replacing equipment.
The theory was to make the system work to supply the
needs of the community and make the landfill a function that
would pay for equipment and for rehabilitation of the
site.
As the landfill became full, the rehabilitation costs
would increase, so money still needed to go into that fund.
Nevertheless, money should be set aside for equipment. All
of this should be done without a deficit.
"The idea is not to milk the taxpayer," said
Alexander.
He understood, said Neil Cook, commission
chairman.
"There should not have to be an increase it rates, the
money just needs to go in the right place," said Cook.
|
