Dickson County Finishes Fiscal Year With Roughly $2 Million General Fund Surplus

Officials clarified that a roughly $6 million improvement over the county’s budget included reserve money that was budgeted but ultimately not needed.

CHARLOTTE — Dickson County finished the fiscal year ending June 30 with approximately $2 million more in general fund revenue than expenditures, county officials reported during the commission’s October 5 work session.

The year-end financial presentation initially highlighted a roughly $6 million improvement over the county’s budgeted position. Officials clarified during the discussion that the larger figure did not represent $6 million in revenue exceeding spending.

Instead, it reflected a combination of stronger-than-projected revenue, spending below budget and money the county had expected to draw from reserves but ultimately did not need.

The distinction matters because a budget can authorize spending more than the county expects to collect in a year, with the difference covered by accumulated fund balance. When revenue comes in higher or spending comes in lower, the county can avoid some or all of that planned withdrawal.

That was the situation described to commissioners as Finance Director Don Hall presented fourth-quarter results for county funds, excluding schools.

Officials cited approximately $44.6 million in general fund revenue and approximately $42.5 million in expenditures. Those rounded figures indicate an operating surplus of about $2.1 million.

The county had budgeted approximately $42.6 million in revenue and approximately $47 million in expenditures, anticipating that reserves would cover the difference.

Because actual revenue exceeded projections and expenditures were substantially below the spending budget, the county’s ending position was roughly $6 million better than anticipated.

The actual surplus, however, remained approximately $2 million.

During the presentation, Hall reported that general fund revenue reached 104 percent of the budgeted amount, while expenditures came in at 90 percent of budget.

He also explained that some late-year budget amendments provide additional spending authority to prevent departments from exceeding their budgets and drawing findings from the state comptroller’s office. Budgeting that authority does not necessarily mean all of the money will be spent.

The discussion helped distinguish three separate figures: what the county expected to collect, what it authorized itself to spend and what actually happened when the books closed.

State Still Owes Approximately $2 Million for Health Department

The financial report also identified approximately $2 million in outstanding state reimbursement related to the county’s new health department.

Hall said the county had already spent the money but had not yet received the full reimbursement from the state.

That outstanding payment affected the capital projects fund, which reported revenue at 65 percent of budget and expenditures at 74 percent.

Officials described the reimbursement as an account receivable — money owed to the county that had not yet been received.

The health department reimbursement is separate from the approximately $2 million general fund surplus. It explains part of the capital projects fund’s reported revenue position and should not be added to the general fund figure.

No specific payment date was provided during the presentation.

Most Other Funds Report Favorable Results

Hall’s report showed that most of the other county funds discussed also collected more revenue than projected while spending less than their expenditure budgets.

The landfill fund received 103 percent of budgeted revenue and spent 97 percent of budgeted expenditures. The highway fund received 111 percent of projected revenue and spent 94 percent of its expenditure budget.

The debt service fund reported revenue at 101 percent of budget and expenditures at 96 percent. The community development and industrial park fund received 114 percent of projected revenue while spending 69 percent of its expenditure budget.

The drug control fund reported both revenue and expenditures above their budgeted amounts, with revenue at 119 percent and expenditures at 103 percent.

Commissioners voted to advance the financial report to the regular commission meeting. They were encouraged to contact Hall with questions before that meeting.

For the general fund, the central finding was that the county collected more than it spent and avoided the reserve withdrawal anticipated in its budget. The approximately $2 million surplus reflects the actual difference between revenue and expenditures; the roughly $6 million figure measures how much better the county finished than its budget had projected.