HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN CHC 1990-03-28 1
Minutes of Regular Meeting
of the
HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER COMMISSION
March 28 , 1990
I. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Bethea called the meeting to
order at approximately 1 : 04 p.m. at the Liquor Commission
Conference Room, 101 Aupuni , Hilo , Hawaii .
II . ROLL CALL:
Members Robert E. Bethea, Chairman
Present : Sherwood Greenwell , Vice Chairman
Pamela F. Cushnie
Francine Duncan
David Fuertes
H. Peter L'Orange
Aileen Lum
Akira T. Omonaka
Patricia M. Poppe
Attorney: Christopher Yuen
Secretary:R. Marie Jacobs
Members James O. Juvik
Absent: Steven T. Nishikawa
III . APPROVE MINUTES OF 02/21/90 &03/07/90: MOTION NO. 1 :
Upon motion made by Mr. Greenwell and seconded by Ms.
Poppe, both sets of minutes were approved as is . All
were in favor.
IV. PUBLIC TESTIMONY:
A. Sandy Schutte: Addressed Article XIV on ethics.
Schutte: Section 14-2 (c) : "Engage in any. . .activity
. . .which might. . . be incompatible. . . . " This language is
so broad that it rules out many people serving on boards
and commissions . Example: Someone serves on a Chamber
of Commerce, and the Chamber makes known that it supports
an issue or project; this therefore disqualifies that
person from serving on a board/commission because, of
conflict of interest (Tape 1: 1 :44) .
835
Schutte: Section 14-5: Confidentiality provision needs
to be included in this section. There is openness in
government meetings . But if ethics meetings concern
individuals , these should be private.
Schutte: Will be glad to come up with wording if
desires. Honolulu Ethics Board wording is a good example
to follow. Bethea: Probably should be a reference to
Section 13 also. Chapter 92 , H.R. S. , requires open
meetings. Judicatory hearings are excluded.
B. Dwight Vicente: Addressed ethics also.
Vicente: This is in reference to Section 14-5 . The
Ethics Board has as an advisor, an attorney from the
County. This should not be. The advisor should be a
private attorney, so there is no conflict of interest.
County representatives should not be included in any
other position on the board either.
Chairman Bethea closed the public testimony portion of
the meeting.
V. AGENDA ITEM NO. 8 : Finance. Barry Mizuno/Finance and
Russell Kokubun/Council were present to present pros and
cons on suggested changes . Bethea: Please refer to
Mizuno/Finance letter of 03/27/90 (Exhibit A) and
financial attachments (Exhibit B) .
Budget Submission Deadline and Fund Transfers: Mizuno:
Suggested giving Council an additional two weeks to
review budget. Presently, Council must accept the budget
on the second reading, which is June 6th, and adopt
budget by June 30th. Mizuno suggested moving the second
reading date back to June 15th with the final budget
acceptance date early July (Tape 1: 1 : 30) . Council will
still have 6 weeks to review the budget; but Council is
parttime.
Kokubun: Appropriations establish different programs at
service levels , which is a policy decision, which Council
should make. He questioned whether the budget is a
policy document; he feels it is. Allowing an additional
week to review the budget is not time enough. We're the
only county that submits its budget that late.
836
Bethea: Incoming revenues cannot be estimated until
Legislature is over. Mizuno: Administration should have
first opportunity to decide how money is spent.
L'Orange: Possible to change accounting year to
September 30th? Federal fiscal year is October 30th.
Bethea: May cause a problem with receiving state funds .
Kokubun: Does not mind administration deciding what to
spend money on initially, because Council is part of the
checks-and-balance system.
Bethea: Once operating budget is adopted, understands
that it is not subject to Council amendment. See Section
10-5 . Capital budget can be amended. Kokubun: Said see
Section 10-8 . Cannot know revenues until see what
receives from the state. Bethea: Council is involved in
lobbying process as well as rest of County.
Kokubun: Legislature will probably be out late this year
(Tape 1 : 2:43) . So budget will be submitted without
benefit of counties knowing exactly how much they will
receive. Greenwell : Council creates legislative program
and mayor carries it through. Mayor modifies money
breakdown.
Yuen: Questioned details of program breakdown submitted
to Legislature. Mizuno: Submits programs ' total amounts
for each department to Legislature. But worksheets with
more detail stays with County personnel . Yuen:
Questioned whether Mizuno could submit preliminary budget
to Council before Legislature closes , based on assump-
tion. Mizuno: Not possible because wouldn' t know how
much are going to be given. Duncan: Council wants to
see where priorities are in administration' s budget.
Mizuno: Yes , can indicate tentatively, without detail ,
what budget could be. Bethea: Questioned whether
Council wants too much budget detail . Kokubun: Doesn' t
need to get into detail of budget , but other items were
handled too loosely before (i .e. fund transferability,
definition of "appropriation duly made" ) . Finite item
budget review caused by abuse of privileges in Charter by
administration.
L'Orange: Doesn' t like the idea of having a "preliminary
budget. " Kokubun: This is opportunity for Charter
Commission to' solve problem which Council and administra-
tion can' t. "Transfers" and "appropriations duly made"
need to be defined. Bethea: Charters says transfers
within departments of unappropriated fund balances can be
837
made by the administration without Council approval.
General: Transfer notification process was discussed.
Mizuno: Maui only has three budgets accounts compared
with our 100+ accounts . Merely requires mayor ' s approval
to transfer funds now. To have to submit to Council
every transfer would be tremendous burden. Kokubun: Can
set a percentage limit for transfer with/without Council
approval . Dante Carpenter bought his car by transferring
funds to a parts account. Poppe: Questions whether
Council should have any input on whether or not a mayor
needs a car; maybe car is needed. Greenwell : Supports
flexibility by administration and giving general amounts
to be used as appropriate.
Cushnie: Questioned the amounts normally transferred
annually (Exhibit B) . Mizuno: Wants Commission to see
change in format between 1987 and 1990. New administra-
tion informs Council of transfers in 1990. In 1987 ,
transfers were buried .
Kokubun: Must consider all budget changes as a whole.
Don' t make a decision on one item without considering
other budget changes. Poppe: Her understanding was that
if budget transfer process were tightened up, shorter
budget review time would be okay. Kokubun: Still needs
budget review opportunity (Tape 2: 2 :44) . Bethea:
Council is receiving a budget too detailed for a policy
level . Yuen: Administration has been submitting to
Council the administration' s details. Not necessary.
Bethea: Section 10-3 says budget does not need to be
itemized any further than by "agencies and programs . "
Reviewing many detailed items is nothing to do with
policy. Yuen: Can understand why Council doesn' t want
to review a budget where departments receive one lump
sum. Poppe: Recommends that transfers over approved
budget go to Council if they are a particular percentage
over budget .
Cushnie: Messrs . Kokubun and Mizuno are suggesting the
Charter Commission might be able to solve this budget
problem because no one else has so far (Tape 2: 1: 32) .
Poppe: Suggested reminding Council and administration to
re-read the budget portion of the Charter. Greenwell :
Charter wording is not explicit enough.
Yuen: Asked if the administration now notifies the
Council of fund transfers. Mizuno: Yes , but it wasn' t
838
done previously. Poppe: Asked Messrs. Mizuno and
Kokubun whether they would agree to allow departments to
transfer 5% over budget? Kokubun: Should say a
percentage over specific department ' s budget--not just a
general statement. L'Orange: Proposes Mr. Yuen prepare
a draft based on comments.
Biennial Budget : Cushnie: Have Messrs . Kokubun and
Mizuno considered a biennial budget? Kokubun: Doesn' t
know how administration can propose biennial budget when
they are uncomfortable with the process of a single-year
budget. Bethea: If the County had taxing options , they
could estimate; but the Governor controls that.
Budget Transfer Notifications : Cushnie: Notifications
would be after the fact (Tape 2: 2: 40) . Poppe: Notifica-
tion not necessary in Charter. Bethea: Feels it is
necessary. Steve Yamashiro would state that the way the
Charter now reads , transfer notification is not
mandated.
MOTION NO. 2: Greenwell: Moved that wording saying the
administration must notify Council of departmental
transfers be in the Charter; seconded by Ms . Poppe. One
person was opposed: Mr . Omonaka. All others were in
favor. The motion passed.
Omonaka: Prefers that the commission go section by
section so he can see what is going to be changed along
the way.
Fiscal Year: Bethea: Need to discuss Section 10-1 ,
changing the fiscal year. MOTION NO. 3 : L'Orange:
Moved that the fiscal year be changed to October 1st;
seconded by Mr. Omonaka (Tape 2: 2: 32) . Mr. Omonaka
withdrew his second based on the discussion. Mr.
Greenwell then seconded the motion so that Mr. Yuen can
look into the item. Mr . L'Orange withdrew his motion.
Discussion: Would give Council enough time to review
everything. Bethea: Not sure how our budget is affected
by state funding.
Section 10-2: Bethea: Asked for any changes in Section
10-2. L'Orange: Suggested adding a new section here to
do away with line-item budgets and made it more general .
Yuen: Could use the word "programmatic. " Will check on
a generally accepted budgetary term.
839
made by the administration without Council approval .
General : Transfer notification process was discussed.
Mizuno: Maui only has three budget accounts per agency
or program compared with our 100+ accounts per agency.
Merely requires mayor ' s approval to transfer funds now.
To have to submit to Council every transfer would be
tremendous burden. Kokubun: Can set a percentage limit
for transfer with/without Council approval . Dante
Carpenter bought his car by transferring funds to a parts
account and then buying the car out of that account.
Poppe: Questions whether Council should have any input
on whether or not a mayor needs a car; maybe car is
needed. Greenwell: Supports flexibility by
administration and giving general amounts to be used as
appropriate.
Cushnie: Questioned the amounts normally transferred
annually (Exhibit B) . Mizuno: Wants Commission to see
change in format between 1987 and 1990. New administra-
tion informs Council of transfers in 1990. In 1987 ,
transfers were buried.
Kokubun: Must consider all budget changes as a whole.
Don' t make a decision on one item without considering
other budget changes . Poppe: Her understanding was that
if budget transfer process were tightened up, shorter
budget review time would be okay. Kokubun: Still needs
budget review opportunity (Tape 2 : 2:44) . Bethea:
Council is receiving a budget too detailed for a policy
level . Yuen: Administration has been submitting to
Council the administration' s details. Not necessary.
Bethea: Section 10-3 says budget does not need to be
itemized any further than by "agencies and programs . "
Reviewing many detailed items is nothing to do with
policy. Yuen: Can understand why Council doesn' t want
to review a budget where departments receive one lump
sum. Poppe: Recommends that transfers over approved
budget go to Council if they are a particular percentage
over budget .
Cushnie: Messrs . Kokubun and Mizuno are suggesting the
Charter Commission might be able to solve this budget
problem because no one else has so far (Tape 2: 1: 32) .
Poppe: Suggested reminding Council and administration to
re-read the budget portion of the Charter. Greenwell :
Charter wording is not explicit enough.
Yuen: Asked if the administration now notifies the
Council of fund transfers . Mizuno: Yes , but it wasn' t
840
least two newspapers of general circulation in the
County" ; Poppe: seconded. All were in favor. L'Orange:
Mr. Yuen will work on the wording.
Poppe: Intent is to make the publication islandwide.
Sections 10-5 , 10-6 and 10-7: No changes suggested.
Poppe: Capital budget in a previous motion was changed
to March 1st also, not only operating budget. Jacobs:
Ms . Cushnie suggested "such other information" in
10-6 (b) (3) be defined.
Section 10-8: Greenwell : Questioned meaning of the
second paragraph: "approved by all council members
present or by two-thirds of the entire membership. "
Yuen: Would like to look up information relative to
quorums and get back to the commission.
Section 10-9 : Bethea: The first sentence of the second
paragraph will include the notification of transfers.
This section also ties in with Section 10-11 , first
sentence. Appropriations are made when the budget is
passed. Yuen: Feels the section is clearly written;
will change the notification section. L'Orange: Wants
notification by resolution left in.
Jacobs: Mizuno requested one sentence inserted in this
section. Yuen: Mizuno wanted it made clear meanings of
transfer and appropriation. Bethea: Already done that.
Sections 10-10 and 10-11 : Poppe: Questioned the
section. Bethea: Questioned contracts carried over for
more than one fiscal year . Yuen: If contract is carried
over , it has to be approved by the Council. Then Section
13-13 (b) was questioned: whether it makes it necessary
for Council to approved contracts entered into by the
administration. Doesn' t seem to be what it means , but
need to look into it at the next meeting.
Sections 10-12 and 10-13 : No changes suggested.
Section 10-14 : Poppe: There was a (c) (2) to increase
amounts . Jacobs: Public Works and Finance wanted $4 , 000
raised to $10 , 000 and the $500 raised to $1 , 000. Yuen:
State law raises bidding amounts , and this is now out of
date. Poppe: Wonders if wording could include increases
as state changes increases; Legislature can amend amounts
each year. But Charter only changes amounts once every
10 years. Greenwell : Amounts don' t have to comply with
state figures.
841
L'Orange: Changing the amounts is beyond our realm.
Yuen: Our County Charter has lower amounts than state
law. MOTION NO. 7: Greenwell : Moved that $4 , 000 be
raised to $10 , 000 and that the $500 be raised to $1 , 000
in these two instances; seconded by Ms. Poppe. All were
in favor. Motion carried.
Yuen: State law covers the whole contract area , Chapter
103 , Hawaii Revised Statutes. Marie will provide copies
at the next meeting.
VI . MOTION NO. 8 : Ms . Poppe made a motion to defer the rest
of the agenda until the next meeting; Mr. Greenwell
seconded. All were in favor.
VII . RECONFIRM/SET NEXT MEETING(S) : The next meeting will be
April 9 , 1990 in Waimea, at 9: 00 a.m. The following
meeting is tentatively set for April 30th at 1 :00 p.m. in
Hilo , location to be decided later.
VIII . ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Bethea adjourned the meeting at
approximately 5 : 00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
2)('?/ i:19A
R. Marie Jacobs
Secretary-Assistant
842
Bernard K. Akana
mayor
�•, • Barry T. Mizuno
U�-,- Department of Finance Director
•.':fir•
25 Aupuni Street, Rm. 118 • Hilo,Hawaii 96720 • (808)961-8234 • Fax(808)961-8248
MARCH 27, 1990
TO: ROBERT E. BETHEA, CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE
HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER COMMISSION
FROM: • BARRY T. MIZUNO, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
72)
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony in response to
your memorandum of March 8 , 1990 . I have chosen to put my
comments in writing to allow the time allotted to questions .
You have cited two areas of concern which need Commission action:
• Determine the adequacy of 60 days for the Council to review,
amend, and adopt an operating budget, and to override the
Mayor ' s veto.
• What mechanism, if any, should be installed for the Mayor to
notify Council of any transfers within an agency.
Deadlines for Budget Submission and Review
Preparing the annual budget is a lengthy process beginning in
October and ending in June. I believe it is the intent of the
Charter that the budget is but one exercise in the entire cycle
of Council reviews designated to maintain the proper checks and
balances between the executive and legislative branches of
County Government and to review programs .
Basically, the Charter mandates policy-making by the Council and
the carrying out of those policies by the Administration. The
General Plan, adopted by the Council, sets forth a long-range
comprehensive physical development plan for the county.
Additionally, the Charter mandates that every program supported
wholly or partially by County funds must be reviewed at least
every four years by Council with determination of funding level
adjustments or program termination. Thus the budget review
should not be seen as the only opportunity to review programs by
Council .
The Charter requires the Mayor to submit his operating budget to
the County Council no later than May 1 . The Charter also
mandates adoption of the budget by June 30 ; thus , review of the
budget by Council must effectively be accomplished within five
or six weeks . EXHIBIT A 843
(4 pages) -
ROBERT E. BETHEA, CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE 2
HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER COMMISSION
March 27, 1990
A six week period should be more than ample time to review the
County budget; however, since the Council is only a part time
body, perhaps additional time could be considered. Two
alternatives would be either to accelerate the May 1 deadline
for submission or to extend the June 30 deadline for adoption.
Submission of the Mayor ' s budget before the present deadline
would not be advisable. Two very important reasons are :
1) The Hawaii State Legislature provides approximately 20% of
the operating revenues to the County. . The grant-in-aid
amount, however, is not known until late April . A variance
in amount of even $1 million would have serious
ramifications for the operating budget .
2) Certification of real property values is submitted on.
April. 20 . This information ,is used to determine tax
revenues for the ensuing year. Submission of a budget
without accurate real property value estimates would also
not be in the County' s best interest. Real property taxes
generate 60% of our total County revenues . - If tax revenue
projections were to change after submission of the budget to
council, I do not believe it to be the intent of the Charter
to allow the Council to initiate such changes to the
operating budget before the Mayor has had an opportunity to
recommend adjustments to the Council .
It is my current understanding that the June 30 deadline for
adoption of the operating budget is absolute. In other words ,
the budget ordinance must be signed by the Mayor or the Mayor ' s
veto overriden by Council by June 30 . It is this latter
restriction which shortens the Council review period since, in
accordance with the Charter, "If it fails to do so, the
operating budget submitted by the mayor shall be deemed adopted
by the council as the operating budget for the ensuing fiscal
year. "
Perhaps consideration should be given that the Council must
adopt the operating budget by June 15 . Only items vetoed by the
Mayor would be allowed to carry over into the new fiscal year
and be resolved by override or by failing to override the
Mayor ' s veto . Language is offered as follows :
844
ROBERT E. BETHEA, CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE 3
HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER COMMISSION
March 27, 1990
SECTION 10-5 . Operating Budget . Council Action.
The council shall adopt the operating budget on or
before the [thirtieth] fifteenth day of June. If it
fails to do so the operating budget submitted by the
mayor shall be deemed adopted by the council as the
operating budget for the ensuing fiscal year.
The adopted operating budget shall be in effect on
and after the first day of the fiscal year' to which it
applies, except for the item(s) or Portion(s) thereof
which the mayor may have vetoed. Such vetoed item(s)
or portion(s) thereof shall not take effect until the
council has had the opportunity for reconsideration
Pursuant to provisions of Section 3-13 .
•
Notification and Authorization of Transfers
The Akana Administration has been aware of the problems in the
past regarding notification of Councilwhen transfers are made.
Thus we revised the monthly report format at the beginning of
the 1989-90 fiscal year to show Council all transfers made
during the fiscal year. While this change has eliminated the
problem of notification, it still has not solved the question of
the Administration' s authority to make transfers within a
department . This question must be settled by the Charter
Commission once and for all .
845
ROBERT E. BETHEA, CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE 4
HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER COMMISSION
March 27, 1990
BiQnnial Budget
As we move into the 1990 ' s, home rule issues are gaining support
in State government. We are hopeful that within a few years the
counties will be allowed new taxing authorities to broaden and
stabilize their revenue base. This change will allow our County
to focus more on the long term future and plan accordingly.
Thus , we urge the Charter Commission to consider requiring a
biennial budget system with only supplemental revisions in the
second year of the budget. This would be consistent with the
State system of budgeting .
Thank you for allowing me to present my thoughts to you in
writing. I would be happy to discuss these points or answer any
questions at this time.
BTM: as
0170S
•
•
846
COUNTY OF HAWAII PAGE
•
FUND 010 GENERAL FUND MONTHLY EXPENDITURE REPORT - DETAILED BUDGET STATUS
MONTH ENDED 2/28/90 YTD% TARGET==> 67 %
•
CURRENT PRIOR YR CURRENT YR YTD SUPPLMNT
ACCT. NO. MONTH CARRY BUDGET APPRO. !---- YEAR TO DATE -----! UNENCUMBERED
OBJ TITLE EXPENDED FORWARD APPROPRIATION & TRANSFERS EXPENDED ENCUMBERED YTD % BALANCE
5173.01 CHIEF ENGR S&W •
011'REGULAR S&W • 29,606 0 360,972 2,000- 249,098 0 69 % 109,874
• 021 OVERTIME S&W 1,465 0 1,500 2,000 3,994 0 114 % 494-
099 MISCELLANEOUS S&W 123- 0 4.000 0 2.914 0 73 % 1.086
5173.01*** CHIEF ENGR S&W 30,948 0' 366,472 0 256,006 0 70 % 110,466
5173.02 CHIEF ENGR OCE,41 ;:;••
101 POSTAGE & FREt.GHfi•' '' 50 0 500 250 0 50 % 250
104 TRAVEL 363 0 6,490 4,449 0 69 % 2,041 •
106 PRINTING AND BINDING 0 • 172 1,000 312 62 32 % 798
107 ADVERTISING 172 . 25 7,000 1,226 154 20 % 5,645
• 109 REPAIRS TO EQUIPMENT 191 0 5,850 2,566 0 44 % 3,284
112 MILEAGE & AUTO ALLOWANCE 87 p
115 MISC. 2,155 1,224 0 57 %% 931
CONTRACT SERVICES
0
225 EDUC-RECR-SCIENTIF SUPP 0 5,100 4,59. - 0 0 0 % 508
60 0 850 140 0 16 % 710
227 COMPUTER & OFFICE SUPP 27 . 85 3,450 .1,153 775 55 % 1,607
235 MISC MATERIALS & SUPP 0 0 600 162 0 27 % 438
337 SUBSCRIP & MEMBERSHIP .0 • 0 1,450 1,197 0 83 X 253
N txI 340 EMPLOYEE AWARDS 80 0 1,400 500 0 36 % 900 '
341 MISC. CHARGES 0 •0 600 .0 0 0 % 600
b H5173.02*** CHIEF ENGR OCE 1,030 '282 36,445 4,59 - 13,179 991 44 % 17,965
W ed
IN I-. 5173.06 CHIEF ENGR EQUIP
M y - 450 OFFICE EQUIP-FIXT-FURN 992 0 6,300 4,592 4,465 4,530 83 % 1,897
to
454 COMPUTER EQPT'& SOFTWARE 0 0 600 195 0 265 33 X 530
`� 5173.06*** CHIEF ENGR EQUIP 992 0 6,900 4,787 4,465 4,795 79 % 2,427
5173.** ***CHIEF ENGINEER 32,970 = = 282 409,817 195 = 273,650 5,786 68 % 130,858'
*DEPT 173 CHIEF ENGINEER. 32,970 ---= --=s=
282= 409,817 195 273,650 5,786 68 % 130,858
=-
DEPT 175 DESIGN & INVESTIGATION
• 5175 DESIGN & INVESTIGATION .
5175.02 DESIGN & INVSTGN OCE
•
106 PRINTING AND BINDING 0 • • 80 0 0 80 0 100 % 0
225 EDUC-RECR-SCIENTIF SUPP 0 124 0 0 124 0 100 % 0
• 227 COMPUTER & OFFICE SUPP • 0 161 0 0 161 0 100 % 0
5175.02*** DESIGN & INVSTGN OCE 0 365 0 0 365 . 0 100 % 0
•
5175.** ***DESIGN & INVESTIGATION 0 365 . 0
• 0 365 0 100 % 0
*DEPT 175 DESIGN & INVESTIGATION 0 365 0 `i
_ L 0 365 0 100 X 0
COUNTY OF HAWAII PAGE 4
FUND U10 GENERAL FUND MONTHLY EXPENDITURE REPORT - DETAILED BUDGET STATUS il
MONTH ENDING 12/31/87 YTDX TARGET==> 50 X 29 . . -;
8ASE.EL ACCOUNT CURRENT MONTH APPROPRIATION YEAR-TO-DATUNENCUMBERED
' _ '
1
OBJ DESCRIPTION EXPENDITURE *CARRYFWD EXPENDED ENCUMBERED • YTD X BALANCE '
___=_a-Leas====e a=z= =a=szasssLSC===s===a===s=a===e z--==r- == z ICC zez=======ez=ea===e=s=e=====a
DEPT 177 LAND SURVEY -_._ . _. ... ..
51f5 DESIGN & INVESTIGATION
']
=z=====_____ __---= a s ====a=s=e==== MCC e==zee=====z= :: I
5175.** *** DESIGN & INVESTIGATION .00 .00 ._ *** X _____
- .00 . ... .00
•
5177 LAND SURVEY
51!7.01 LAND SURVEY S&W
- --
011 REGULAR S&W 11,281 .60 140,688.00 71,004.38 .00 50 X 69,683.62 7,, 1
•
021 OVERTIME S&W .00 1,000.00 66.77 .00 7X Y33.23 _ _
UYY MISCELLANEOUS SSW aQQ -_ -1C1QQaUQ Nana44 __Z x____________ _ .
1[QL11QQ ij
51 (7.01 *** LAND SURVEY S&W 11,281 .60 14[,788.00 71,150.15 .00 50 X 71,637.85 ij
51(7.02 LAND SURVEY OCE
. _ . I:
1U4 TRAVEL 50.98 4,978.00 2,116.71 .00 43 X 2,861.29
106 PRINTING AND BINDING65.00 300.00 138.00 .00 46 X 162.00I.
10Y REPAIRS TO EQUIPMENT .00 1,000.00 45.00 92.29 14 X 862.71
115 MISC. CONTRACT SERVICES 20.95 3,000.00 156.51 .00 5 X 2,843.49 ;; li
235 MISC MATERIALS & SUPP 1Za36 ___._...----1[$ZQaQQ _.__. 53haZQ 168.'33 34.-X__- --,--- Et0A24_ ,„ �,
51((.UC *** LAND SURVEY OCE 154.29 11,148.00 3,290.92 260.62 32 X 7,596.46- 3
51 !7• .06 LAND SURVEY EQUIP ______
480 MISC. EQUIPMENT
'AN ----ZcZQQaDD aQQ -U XLINa ,700...0
.00 2,700.00 .00 .00 U X 2,700.00
51f7.U6 *** LAND SURVEY EQUIP - . 0
00 .. ,
)1 !7.24 APPRAISAL SERV UNFUNDED
115 MISC. CONTRACT SERVICES An ZCMaQQ ZCIQQtQQ aQQ IQQ X aQQ ;.4d
51(7.24 *** APPRAISAL SERV UNFUNDED .00 2,500.00 2,500.00 .00 100 X • .OU
_ ea-e =L.. 2===...====.--.. it==== e=zsa=s==s==e MCC saa= e- ^'
,
111
5117.** *** LAND SURVEY 11,435.89 159,136.00 76,941.07 260.62 49 X 81,934.31 •
•
•
*DEPT 177 TOTAL LAND SURVEY 11,435.89 159,136.00 76,941.07 260.62 49 X 81,934.31
ea==sees=zz= z---_-===sae ---._ .__... • - . -........ .. --- - ---- ------
•• =sesa=saea= ====aeee=zszesaz==aa=eseeeazseeez=s=eeez=seazzs=a .
•
,
DEPT 179 ADMIN & LAND ACQ •
•
5179 ADMIN & LAND ACO a
-. - . .
51 (9.01 ADM & LAND ACQ S&W -
011 REGULAR S&W 7,859.00 85,548.00 45,198.00 .00 53 X 40,350.00
U21 OVERTIME S&W .00 .__•_-________ 500.00 ____..____.-•. _.- 166.19 _ _---. .00_._.__33..1- .. 333.81 ' it
UYY MISCELLANEOUS S&W AN YQQaQQ 3a4Z an --Q X 9215a5d
51'Y.U1 *** ADM &; LAND ACQ S&W 7,859.00 86,948.00 45,367.61 .00 52 X 41,580.39 „ C
51(9.02 ADM & LAND ACQ OCE ;
104 TRAVEL .- 82.50 1,400.00 225.28 .00 16 X 1,174.72 , CI
C70
•
.
a
w - .-,